using Magnets on your plants
- Thread starter DrFever
- Start date
Small time
Member
Should they be rotated slow or fast? Maybe fast enough to make a generator?
ShattaBrain
New member
I'd imagine this could work via pulling metallic nutrients closer to the roots, or stopping heavier minerals from falling to the bottom when watered. ideally it might be worth it to try 3 rare earth magnets in a triangular formation round the main stem, just at the surface of the soil, or a little lower.
-but having it above soil surface may help pull nutrients into the stem
-but having it above soil surface may help pull nutrients into the stem
I tried that last grow. Didn't notice anything, then I upped it to 6 REMs, still nothing discernibly different from the same clone in the same bubbler next to it.
Maybe the bubbler doesn't work like feeding from the top
Maybe the bubbler doesn't work like feeding from the top
I can't say I am shocked by the negative comments
The school system is designed to prevent creative minds to think outside the carefully controlled matrix
I'm not selling anything, and neither is the OP, so STFU
I don't mean that in a bad way lol
I rearranged the location of the magnets and added a plastic bottle filled with small ornamental rock for the nutes to flow through on their journey back to the rez
Pistils clustering after just 7 days
Pics
View attachment 266292 View attachment 266293
View attachment 266294 View attachment 266295
The school system is designed to prevent creative minds to think outside the carefully controlled matrix
I'm not selling anything, and neither is the OP, so STFU
I don't mean that in a bad way lol
I rearranged the location of the magnets and added a plastic bottle filled with small ornamental rock for the nutes to flow through on their journey back to the rez
Pistils clustering after just 7 days
Pics
View attachment 266292 View attachment 266293
View attachment 266294 View attachment 266295
Minerals are the building blocks of life. The sea is the 'primal soup' from which all life on earth originates. There is no place on earth with a higher concentration of minerals than the sea. Sea water covers 70% of the planet's surface. Animal and plant life thrive in an unpolluted sea environment, so much so that a double life span is easily reached compared to life on land, and in perfect health. This is because disease is the result of mineral shortages and acidification and this does not naturally occur in a sea environment. If it does occur, man is to blame, not nature
Photosynthesis is the interaction of sunlight and water. This forms the basis of all plant life. This too began in the sea. Chlorophyll is the product of photosynthesis and led to green, one-celled organisms. These washed onto land and led to plant life. People and animals not only share a genetic link with the sea but also with green plants, as chlorophyll is 98% identical to blood. Chlorophyll, too, has a magnesium core while iron forms the basis for blood. The conversion of magnesium in chlorophyll to iron is once again complete once this comes into contact with blood. Like sea water, chlorophyll is therefore a plasma and is sometimes referred to as the 'blood of the plant'.
Who would of ever thought ???? so who ever dismisses using some sort of magnetism / to either effect the molecules of nutrients or to stimulate the plant in any form does not work think again without Magnetism we probably wouldn't survive
but back to what i wrote who ever thought sea water could be used in agriculture would probably get laughed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDXvZGuhs6U Guess the people that were laughing back then are eatting there words cause sea farming is being used all over from mexico to the deserts of africa
Photosynthesis is the interaction of sunlight and water. This forms the basis of all plant life. This too began in the sea. Chlorophyll is the product of photosynthesis and led to green, one-celled organisms. These washed onto land and led to plant life. People and animals not only share a genetic link with the sea but also with green plants, as chlorophyll is 98% identical to blood. Chlorophyll, too, has a magnesium core while iron forms the basis for blood. The conversion of magnesium in chlorophyll to iron is once again complete once this comes into contact with blood. Like sea water, chlorophyll is therefore a plasma and is sometimes referred to as the 'blood of the plant'.
Who would of ever thought ???? so who ever dismisses using some sort of magnetism / to either effect the molecules of nutrients or to stimulate the plant in any form does not work think again without Magnetism we probably wouldn't survive
but back to what i wrote who ever thought sea water could be used in agriculture would probably get laughed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDXvZGuhs6U Guess the people that were laughing back then are eatting there words cause sea farming is being used all over from mexico to the deserts of africa
Who would of ever thought that two short paragraphs could contain so many lies , errors and misconceptions.
You should write articles for Naturalnews , or the Mail online.
Or you could simply educate yourself and save the embarrassment.
All you did was copy and précis this junk article and pass it off as your own writing.
You should write articles for Naturalnews , or the Mail online.
Or you could simply educate yourself and save the embarrassment.
All you did was copy and précis this junk article and pass it off as your own writing.
The magnetic field must be moving.
If it is not, it will add no energy, unless it holds magnetic resonance with something else, that will cause the plant to move electrons also, to create a voltage.
Other than that, I would say screw with the nodes, so that the symettry is changed. Like those caterpillar buds.
You know? Like on beefsteak tomatoes, you can see the division? Kind of like how starfish are five, but plants at first are two?
Sometimes they are tripled and other shit.
This is like how 4 leaf clovers happen.
This is why you spank tomatoes, you screw up the hydrodynamic sensing plants use to orient themselves and where cells go, so it ends up creating multiples of it's sides.
Like spanking tomatoes, or pinching stems, it causes misdirection and multiplication of directions. In siamese cats, their brain parts overlap too much, so to get a coherent image, they cross their eyes.
The end.
If it is not, it will add no energy, unless it holds magnetic resonance with something else, that will cause the plant to move electrons also, to create a voltage.
Other than that, I would say screw with the nodes, so that the symettry is changed. Like those caterpillar buds.
You know? Like on beefsteak tomatoes, you can see the division? Kind of like how starfish are five, but plants at first are two?
Sometimes they are tripled and other shit.
This is like how 4 leaf clovers happen.
This is why you spank tomatoes, you screw up the hydrodynamic sensing plants use to orient themselves and where cells go, so it ends up creating multiples of it's sides.
Like spanking tomatoes, or pinching stems, it causes misdirection and multiplication of directions. In siamese cats, their brain parts overlap too much, so to get a coherent image, they cross their eyes.
The end.
First, I think the mag field needs to be strong enough
To effect that I am using 2 magnets in repulse
There is an energy field between them when they are within repulse range of each other
Each magnet attracts a large nut. The 2 nuts are between the 2 magnets, creating a constant repulse field
Come by my new thread Mini-Me to see how well my plant is revegging
Is it solely because of the magnets? Of course not, but I do believe they are playing a role
To effect that I am using 2 magnets in repulse
There is an energy field between them when they are within repulse range of each other
Each magnet attracts a large nut. The 2 nuts are between the 2 magnets, creating a constant repulse field
Come by my new thread Mini-Me to see how well my plant is revegging
Is it solely because of the magnets? Of course not, but I do believe they are playing a role
Hey PET nice to see everything going well let the haters be haters it really doesn't matter Sooner these people realize that the NPK break is of molecules that have electrons so having a magnetic field might actually do something i think the answer is in magnetizing your water
i think in next 10 years there will be proof by science
i think in next 10 years there will be proof by science
I wouldn't hold my breath, unless those in charge of suppressing real science are finally removed
There is an awesome thread I tripped over the other day that you might like. It blew my mind for sure.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=42695
IMO i think that is more spiritual from the few posts i have read lol
Since my last grow (pics in prior post #466; 5/11) I moved from top feed to a true F & D.
The key being using a small 4g tote with high walls, which allows for more nutes to get up high on the net pot feeding roots closer to the main stem/trunk, yet only requires a small rez.
Now nutes flow both ways through the magnetic center, which is in repulse
View attachment 284315
8/9
View attachment 284317
9/17
View attachment 284316
The key being using a small 4g tote with high walls, which allows for more nutes to get up high on the net pot feeding roots closer to the main stem/trunk, yet only requires a small rez.
Now nutes flow both ways through the magnetic center, which is in repulse
View attachment 284315
8/9
View attachment 284317
9/17
View attachment 284316
stickyuser
Member
Daaamn, a pure scientist! 
I am a strong believer in magnetism use.
Granted no science behind my beliefs, however grows that i've had USING magnets have always been easier, less issues, and higher yield.
Unfortunately due to my limited space, i've eben unable to do a pure side by side, however it does seem using magnets gives a better plant growth overall.
The stands, what type of magnets are best? Electronic? Neo? etc. Also since we have limited abilities in realyl studying things, its really hard to see exactly the process of which this affects plants.
Another question would be, how does the earths magnet really affect plants? Does it at all? If one were to go to space and go beyond our earths magnetic field, how would this affect the growth of a plant?
Granted no science behind my beliefs, however grows that i've had USING magnets have always been easier, less issues, and higher yield.
Unfortunately due to my limited space, i've eben unable to do a pure side by side, however it does seem using magnets gives a better plant growth overall.
The stands, what type of magnets are best? Electronic? Neo? etc. Also since we have limited abilities in realyl studying things, its really hard to see exactly the process of which this affects plants.
Another question would be, how does the earths magnet really affect plants? Does it at all? If one were to go to space and go beyond our earths magnetic field, how would this affect the growth of a plant?
Last edited:
sandbar
Member
For an experiment to provide something worthwhile, it is generally required to have some sort of control group. This means you would need a significant sample size consisting of identical clones nutes soil light etc, which is then split into two groups: A control group which receives no magnetic field and an experimental group which is subjected to a constant magnetic field.
With the high amount of flux generated by a typical growrooms electricity consumption, I doubt we would see any significant changes to the experimental group, since surely a significant number of members in these very forums have already unknowingly grown plants in strong magnetic fields. If the difference was significant we would be likely to see threads popping up such as "why are my plants close to the ballast yielding more than my plants further away?"
I like your curiosity and effort you have put into this idea but unfortunately the way you have designed the study doesn't provide any useable information.
With the high amount of flux generated by a typical growrooms electricity consumption, I doubt we would see any significant changes to the experimental group, since surely a significant number of members in these very forums have already unknowingly grown plants in strong magnetic fields. If the difference was significant we would be likely to see threads popping up such as "why are my plants close to the ballast yielding more than my plants further away?"
I like your curiosity and effort you have put into this idea but unfortunately the way you have designed the study doesn't provide any useable information.
