Is this a digital ballast?

[dec]

Hey!
Probably a stupid question but I need to know for sure.

Can anyone please confirm that >>>>>>>>link removed, TOU>>>>>>>> (page 3-4) is a proper digital ballast for a cmh bulb?

Thank you!

 

[sso]

it says so on the page.

 

[monsoon]

That's not a plug and play ballast like growers use... and it's for very small lamps.

What are you trying to do? If you need a digi ballast just up for a Quantum that is ready to rock. These are merely components to a larger system, IMO.

best of luck

 

[dec]

I will have a 70w cmh micro grow. That's why I'm asking if this is a digital ballast.

 

[d.stillhigh]

good luck.

 

[fungzyme]

yep, it's for a 70w cmh or for 2 35w bulbs in parallel. I've never seen a digital cmh ballast that wasn't ridiculously expensive, so I imagine this won't be a good value for the amount of light you get. You can get a 150w digital for $50 or less, or go with a standard low watt hps security light setup. CMH isn't all that superior to be worth the extra money, esp at that low wattage, IMO.

 

[dec]

Thanks fungzyme!

I bought the bulb and the digital ballast for 84$. So it's not that expensive.

IMO at lower wattage it's cmh>hps.Cmh bulb runs cooler then hps (which is very important in a micro grow),because of the full spectrum it's good for veg and flower and makes plants more potent because of the UVB.

 

[vukman]

.....because of the full spectrum it's good for veg and flower and makes plants more potent because of the UVB.

wow, I'm sorry, I can't let this one go. Can you please show me one piece of scientific data which says that plants benefit from uvb light?
I may be totally wrong but as far as I know, plants have pigments within them to protect against UV light...Mind you, some uva light is said to help the plant fight off certain pests which is controversial as well but uvb light?

uvb is between ~260nm-~320nm
uva is between ~320nm-~400nm

From 400 on is the visible spectrum to around 750 but the 'normal human eye' can see from around 450-700.......

I don't know..maybe I haven't found the right data...

vukman

 

[monsoon]

Thanks for keepin it real and asking for the proof in such a statement, vukman. I've yet to see a light that makes pot "more potent", but hey, I too am willing to look at factual data and be proven wrong if such data exists.

 

[dec]

HERE


and

[YOUTUBEIF]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfiI78uN3Ks[/YOUTUBEIF]

You probably know by now that there is very little research done on cannabis other than what is done in communities like this one so it's probably gonna take while before we find out.
UV light increases the plants protective defenses, increase beta carotene, oils, and resins. With all of that being said, UV light should increase THC as it is a resin produced as a defense mechanism.

 

[dec]

The video doesn't want to work...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfiI78uN3Ks

 

[vukman]

OKay, just watched Mr. Pot man there.. He openly admits that 'he thinks' that the uvb is the catalyst. No proof. His hypothesis about the high uvb areas of the world just happen to coincide with the tropics and equatorial areas of the world. What a big surprise that is where the best weed grows.....How come we can grow weed that is 25% THC with the lights we use now.. Are you really trying to say that exposing your plants to uvb light wave spectrum will somehow give you 30-35% THC content.
Even that page that you linked does not state where the references come from. Once again, no reputable references, I have to think and believe it's speculation.

I fully agree that nowhere near the amount of research has been done on cannabis that needs to be but until that time comes, I'd rather not play around with a spectrum of the light that can be harmful and detrimental to myself or the plants I grow..

I used to weld. I've been burned so badly that I couldn't go to work for a week. All due to uvb. You'll have to excuse me if I'm a little squeamish these days about it. I'll wait until there is concrete scientific proof on the subject before I go playing around with trying to see if 1, 2 or 10 leds @ 260nm will give me 2% more THC.

I am not trying to sound condescending by any means. If you feel as though you need to play around with wave lengths you can't see, by all means, please do and let us know how it goes.. I am more than curious to see the outcome as I'm sure others are.

Good Luck
vukman

 

[dec]

I admint I rushed into what I wrote before but there seems to be something on to this but we can't be sure until we get some scientific data,as you said.

Hope this myth gets busted or confirmed soon

 

[vukman]

It's all good brother/sister.........we don't learn unless we ask questions.. Believe me, I would be the happiest person in the world if there was some new 'thing' to help us grow better......

Peace...........always
vukman

 

[vukman]

I am a man of my word so I have to say something here.....There seems to be strong evidence to SUPPORT the uptake of UVA and UVB in cannabis....albeit is does state 'in some varieties' and does not state which ones..:-(
I have read this.....http://www.hempfood.com/iha/iha01201.html
which is a study done.
Pate, D.W., 1994. Chemical ecology of Cannabis. Journal of the International Hemp Association 2: 29, 32-37.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Reference........I stand corrected........