Blinddate, HPS is not sulphur plasma, thanks for your insightful nothingness
SULFUR PLASMA LIGHTING!!!! 100% SUN
- Thread starter B. Friendly
- Start date
the only thing not to see an andvancement in 20 years would be lighting.
If you're happy with what's currently available good for you.
I am not peddling just stimulating intellect, beware Sgt. whatever this might blow your pee for a brain.
Zealious
Member
http://www.hidhut.com/catalog/dual-arc-1000w-lamp-mh-and-hps-in-one-bulb-p-1593.html
they are called dual arc. they require a HPS ballast. And usualy come in 600w or 1000w I belive the 600w has a 400w hps and a 250w mh and the 1000 is a 600w hps with a 400w mh.
Let me ask you this... Im currently running 1 400w mh in my air cooled hood. but I was thinking about adding another light into the hood... Would it be a waste of time and money to add a 250w hps into the hood?
It makes sense to me since both the 400w mh and the 250hps are around the same lumes.. So that I could keep both bulbs at the same distance from the cannopy. And hopefully there will not be too much of an increase in temps..
OR should I just go with a 600w hps.
they are called dual arc. they require a HPS ballast. And usualy come in 600w or 1000w I belive the 600w has a 400w hps and a 250w mh and the 1000 is a 600w hps with a 400w mh.
Let me ask you this... Im currently running 1 400w mh in my air cooled hood. but I was thinking about adding another light into the hood... Would it be a waste of time and money to add a 250w hps into the hood?
It makes sense to me since both the 400w mh and the 250hps are around the same lumes.. So that I could keep both bulbs at the same distance from the cannopy. And hopefully there will not be too much of an increase in temps..
OR should I just go with a 600w hps.
2
2Lazy
Hey guys, I just wanted to drop this because I've been looking into Plasma for some time now.
To whomever is crying about these being the same technology: You have very obviously not done any research into what is current. You did your learning 10 years ago and now it would seem you refuse to believe anyone is working on it.
I happen to live in the same area as Luxim lighting and I had a chance to go to their hq in sunnyvale and see their lab. Ironically I was there on business of another kind and I got a first hand look a their new tech.
I suppose in many ways a micro processor is the same thing it was 10 years ago. Still has a front side bus, still has a heat sink... So this "plasma is old news" argument is extremely lame. Conversational constipation.
Anyway. Plasma lighting is legit, most aquarium and coral growers love the lighting effects. They featured them at the Monterey Bay Aquarium (also in my area) and I had a chance to see them up close there as well.
Bottom line is, I've been to Luxim. I've seen the bulbs in use. And I've done it within the last 18 months (or so). Can anyone else make that claim to back up their opinions?
Here is a link to a DIY 250w luxim kit. http://diyprojectorkits.com/store/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=19&zenid=b5143c5d7972bff6e9d3212d74991d1e They charge $680 for the kit which include a power supply system and bulb.
I agree that Plasma hasn't reached the pinnacle of it's potential but it isn't a horrible choice for someone with the cash who would like to experiment. I think the science behind these bulbs speaks for itself and doesn't require me to do so on plasmas behalf.
To whomever is crying about these being the same technology: You have very obviously not done any research into what is current. You did your learning 10 years ago and now it would seem you refuse to believe anyone is working on it.
I happen to live in the same area as Luxim lighting and I had a chance to go to their hq in sunnyvale and see their lab. Ironically I was there on business of another kind and I got a first hand look a their new tech.
I suppose in many ways a micro processor is the same thing it was 10 years ago. Still has a front side bus, still has a heat sink... So this "plasma is old news" argument is extremely lame. Conversational constipation.
Anyway. Plasma lighting is legit, most aquarium and coral growers love the lighting effects. They featured them at the Monterey Bay Aquarium (also in my area) and I had a chance to see them up close there as well.
Bottom line is, I've been to Luxim. I've seen the bulbs in use. And I've done it within the last 18 months (or so). Can anyone else make that claim to back up their opinions?
Here is a link to a DIY 250w luxim kit. http://diyprojectorkits.com/store/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=19&zenid=b5143c5d7972bff6e9d3212d74991d1e They charge $680 for the kit which include a power supply system and bulb.
I agree that Plasma hasn't reached the pinnacle of it's potential but it isn't a horrible choice for someone with the cash who would like to experiment. I think the science behind these bulbs speaks for itself and doesn't require me to do so on plasmas behalf.
S
secondtry
How about you back up that claim with some rational? And trust me, I am not idiot, unless you can explain aspects of light quantum physics for us like I can??? (yea, I didn't think so, now go back to your sandbox)
S
secondtry
@ B.Friendly,
Don't you love it when all these "smart guys" come out of the woodwork with nothing but a empty opinionated sentence? I have yet to see one of these smart guys post data or the 'whys'...
While I think plasma lighting isn't where we need to go I have a open mind about it and will wait for data to make up my mind.
All the best (ignore the trolls, I have been trying my hardest but it's getting frustrating, I may leave this site this week due to the increasing signal to noise ratio...)
Don't you love it when all these "smart guys" come out of the woodwork with nothing but a empty opinionated sentence? I have yet to see one of these smart guys post data or the 'whys'...
While I think plasma lighting isn't where we need to go I have a open mind about it and will wait for data to make up my mind.
All the best (ignore the trolls, I have been trying my hardest but it's getting frustrating, I may leave this site this week due to the increasing signal to noise ratio...)
By hitting single molecules with quadrillionth-of-a-second laser pulses, scientists have revealed the quantum physics underlying photosynthesis, the process used by plants and bacteria to capture light’s energy at efficiencies unapproached by human engineers. The quantum wizardry appears to occur in each of a photosynthetic cell’s millions of antenna proteins. These route energy from electrons spinning in photon-sensitive molecules to nearby reaction-center proteins, which convert it to cell-driving charges. Almost no energy is lost in between. That’s because it exists in multiple places at once, and always finds the shortest path.
So you see professor. It has more to do with what our plant does with the light than the light itself. Feed them the proper spectrum (which is well known) at the proper energy level (which is well known) and that is the best you can do. Many people have used these bulbs (sulpher) and found zero advantage for growing.
As for the Luxim plasma bulbs. Yes, they do look promising, but if you read the specs, they're about 4 time less efficient as an HPS as far as watts per lumens goes. Maybe they can make up for it in PAR. I don't know. I'll bet they don't either.
Last edited:
Trichgnomes
Member
Edit
2
2Lazy
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1739386
Here's some data from a guy who wanted to incorporate it into his aquarium. It's more of an experience piece than a science document but I think it was well documented and you can take what you will with it.
Many people seem to think they have this extremely detailed view of the quantum universe thanks to the discovery channel and the nifty computer graphics. Some people have done a good amount of homework. Either way, what is important is the conceptual understanding. The very fact that no one has talked about ppfd here demonstrates the surface understanding of the science behind the production of the light.
I'm not going to sit here and try to say I have a full spectral analysis of the plasma bulbs, but I do know that our source of natural light, the Sun, is plasmatic. As far as replicating the sun... Plasma is about as close as we're going to get in that regard. With the size of the lamp being about the same as the size of an LED I can easily see how the technology here has potential.
With the size situation, and the heat sink capability, several of these lamps can be placed very close together. With the right engineering mentality (a good idea guy like yours truly) and a little more time a really nice horticulture light source could be designed. I think it's close, and all it really takes is someone committed to the creation of a sun replacement horticulture plasma lamp.
That is very interesting 2Lazy. Who says that the sun is the BEST light for plants? We can come up with a technology better than the sun. At least when considering energy efficiency. Look at the whole blue/red spectrum LED thing. If LEDs were more powerful, that could be enough. The sun is like the guy who has to satisfy everybody. We only have to satisfy 1 plant.
D
draco
seems to me that the plant evolved by the sun; the sun is what the plant recognizes...
we might know (to a certain extent) what goes on in the cells of plants, but what else goes on with the plant, and what kind of light makes this unknown happen? just like we have a limited idea what happens in the human cell, but that does not hint at the higher functions and expressions that are also part of human life that need to be nutured.
we can be fed the right food in the perfect physical environment and still be poor examples of what a human can be... i suspect we really know very little of what the life of a plant is really about... how could we know how to give something to help if we aren't aware of a need?
we seem to know the light needs of the plant to suit our purposes. as to why the plant exists and what it is really doing... well, we as humans feel it a little sometimes, but don't even know how much we don't know...
we might know (to a certain extent) what goes on in the cells of plants, but what else goes on with the plant, and what kind of light makes this unknown happen? just like we have a limited idea what happens in the human cell, but that does not hint at the higher functions and expressions that are also part of human life that need to be nutured.
we can be fed the right food in the perfect physical environment and still be poor examples of what a human can be... i suspect we really know very little of what the life of a plant is really about... how could we know how to give something to help if we aren't aware of a need?
we seem to know the light needs of the plant to suit our purposes. as to why the plant exists and what it is really doing... well, we as humans feel it a little sometimes, but don't even know how much we don't know...
B
bakunin15
I'm interested to know where you got this info as the specs i've read claim the opposite...they're more efficient then an HPS.
Has anyone seen Chameleon Solar Genesis in action? It uses the Luxim technology...uses argon gas no sulfer...no electrodes (uses magnetism to excite the gas) draws around 260 Watts and its only the size of a tic tac. The solarGenII uses 2 of these small bulbs 6" apart in 1 unit and the company is claiming it outperforms a 1000w HPS. No Heat!
http://www.chameleongrowsystems.com/store/comparisons/side-by-side.html
much appreciated if some of you light experts chime in as I'm very curious about this...do not overlook this technology because of LED failures
chilliwilli
Waterboy
Long time no see.
Anyone using that kind of lights?
Some years ago a guy working at flowery field cloneshop said they use the 300w sulfur plasma as veg light for ~80x80cm(smaller than 3x3) footprint. In their opinion the best veg light, easy to take clones every 14d from mothers. Not sure if they still use it or have switched to leds.
The price was very high(1000euro) so i never tried it. Iirc ther was also a bulb "better" for flowering.
Anyone using that kind of lights?
Some years ago a guy working at flowery field cloneshop said they use the 300w sulfur plasma as veg light for ~80x80cm(smaller than 3x3) footprint. In their opinion the best veg light, easy to take clones every 14d from mothers. Not sure if they still use it or have switched to leds.
The price was very high(1000euro) so i never tried it. Iirc ther was also a bulb "better" for flowering.
S
sallyforthDeleted member 75382
Prices have come down on Plasma lighting. Gavita do a nice one for about £900 or $1000 that’s a 1000w model.They generally have a CRI of 98% which is very close to natural sunlight. LED for example is generally between 80 - 90 which is still good for growing but not very good like CMH or Plasma.
Growenhaft
Active member
They continue to use lsr... everything else makes little sense with cuttings. The stronger the light, the longer it takes to root and the worse for the cutting. The light should serve the plants purely as a temporal orientation aid... to prevent pre-flowering... the energy that the plant needs to form new roots does not need to be drawn from the light... it has long been in it... stored in the stem and scroll. Lsr is there in terms of acquisition and dealing with operating costs... but above all for the vitality of the cuttings and its development process when it comes to new roots, it's pretty much unbeatable. The light color of the lsr... with sativa cuttings it is different than with indicas... with hybrids depending on where the genetic heavyweight is located
Last edited:
