THE END OF H.I.Ds?? Sulphur plama technology

[MrNatural]

the first units to be sold in the uk supposedly in october will cost around 1500pounds. I agree somewhat that they will be well overkill in a small grow, but someone needing say four 600w hps or halides to light their room will need only one sulphur plasma lamp using just 1340w mounted to the ceiling and never need to raise or lower the light because its just so powerful! Smaller 1000 700 and 500w models will also be available.

The Magnetron in a Plasma lamp *is* the power grabber, it produces microwaves to excite the sulphur/argon/+ to plasma -it's very efficient

These types of lamps are also dimmable - unlike HID/MH/VFL so if you want to use it as a 200 watt lamp - do so. Otherwise use light pipes and pipe the light to where you want it - at room temp. Heat doesn't make plants grow, it's the RGB content that provides photosynthesis.

IMO 1500£ for 1340W @600kL over 10 years - is far better than the equivalent HID/MH * replacement parts in £/kL .... still it's a lot to fork out but it's only the once - not over a 10 year period.

 

[calicat]

right i recieved my copy of urban garden magazine today and was just flicking thru wen i stumbled upon this. Please take a moment to read a few snippets from the article and say what u think. The sulphur lamp is a golf ball sized 3mm thick quartz sphere filled with argon gas and a small amount of sulphur, the lamp spins at 600rpm at the end of a glass stick driven by a fan cooled motor, as it spins it is bombarded with microwave energy focused by a magnetron,microwaves excite the sulphur in the lamp to the fourth state of matter - plasma, thus producing an extremely bright light very close to sunlight! The sulphur lamp produces a full spectrum of light with an efficiency far greater than any other light source, there are no gaps or spikes in the spectral distribution. Sp lamps produce far less IR light than any other grow lamp technology, this is immediately realisable because so much less heat means many more applications. Full and continuous spectrum is very close to sunlight so it feels like sun to all life forms including humans plants and fish. Light output and colour doesnt degrade over time and the light is also dimmable!! The lamps last ten years and because there is no electrodes to degrade or burn out the lamps efficiency drops from 100% to 95% in the first 100 hours of use, there is no degradation after this point so thats 95% efficiency for 10 years! Now for the exciting bit... In 2006, 400.000 lumens was measured from a 1340w sp lamp at the amsterdam horticulture show, in 2007, 570.000 lumens again from a 1340w sp lamp at jana university, germany. And in 2008 600.000 lumens were measured at the volkswagon factory Germany(witnessed by Roland Loosli of growbox.ch)They are available now only for carefully chosen experimental projects, but in october 2008 a commercial supply is planned to commence in the uk with the first units retailing around GBP1500. Now for the piccy's sorry if theyre not that clear im takin pics of the pics in the mag, first two pics are the lamp itself, the third pic is a diagram showin how it works forth pic u can see in the chart how close the spectrum is to the suns spectum illustrated by the red line compared with mh.... Wow. im amazed....

Interesting information. Thanks for posting it.

 

[wmike82]

To clear up a disagreement between techhead420 and londoner, I also read below the chart (not inside the chart) this:

Plasma International - Tesla 1000 Lamp ’The Sun on Earth’ 0.57 Million Lumen
Spectral Power Distribution Data Source: Jena University October 2007

Inside the chart is where it discussed lux etc.

But, I also wanted to add that they have been tinkering with additives to increase red output, such as the Calcium Bromide model (CaBr2) which peaks red at 650nm to the intensity of the Sun.

This is where plants photosynthesize at 100% efficiency.

As for Auxin hormones... Run your light tubes through an Omega Garden... Hmm. And try playing positive music (as was discussed in an article in this forum) or just try the SonicBloom sound and foliar mix combo.

Oh yea, and hey, anyone who reads this ever try AireOx? It's a carbon scrubber (4lb of carbon) with an industrial additive (Purafil?) that allows the carbon to absorb more... with an internal industrial grade blower, with all internal bearings or something... This allows it to never need replacing and also makes it SUPER quiet. They're really costly but might very well be worth it... Haven't seen 'em on ebay though.

 

[techhead420]

To clear up a disagreement between techhead420 and londoner, I also read below the chart (not inside the chart) this:

Plasma International - Tesla 1000 Lamp ’The Sun on Earth’ 0.57 Million Lumen
Spectral Power Distribution Data Source: Jena University October 2007

Inside the chart is where it discussed lux etc.

But, I also wanted to add that they have been tinkering with additives to increase red output, such as the Calcium Bromide model (CaBr2) which peaks red at 650nm to the intensity of the Sun.

This is where plants photosynthesize at 100% efficiency.

As for Auxin hormones... Run your light tubes through an Omega Garden... Hmm. And try playing positive music (as was discussed in an article in this forum) or just try the SonicBloom sound and foliar mix combo.

Oh yea, and hey, anyone who reads this ever try AireOx? It's a carbon scrubber (4lb of carbon) with an industrial additive (Purafil?) that allows the carbon to absorb more... with an internal industrial grade blower, with all internal bearings or something... This allows it to never need replacing and also makes it SUPER quiet. They're really costly but might very well be worth it... Haven't seen 'em on ebay though.

You people can believe what ever you want, I rely on the science and my engineering training. As stated before, ANY ENGINEER trained in photonics, like I have been, isn't going to take claims of >500 lumens/watt seriously (it's completely laughable, you'd have to be more than 100% efficient) and it plainly shows in the table below the chart that you'll get 160 lumens/watt.

BTW, if you optimize a light for more red then you'll get less lumens per watt. Red light has lower luminous efficiacy. But then again, lumens is NEVER used in photobiology.

 

[wmike82]

It does show the intensity of the bulb slightly drops with the added CaBr2, but the beneficial output for plants is well worth it.

However, I will still settle for the MUCH cheaper Ceramic Metal Halide which has a very convincing spectrum and intensity.

I don't know what to believe, however, I do know that no matter what your books you read in University say, that of coarse with the reality of Phenomena existing, it is also possible that the LAWS you are talking about aren't fully accurate as well. Jeeze, first law of thermodynamics is flawed, so whats to say there isn't any others that are flawed.

Yes, yes, you are an engineer, and you have a lot of practical conventional experience... But you have to take into consideration that what is being displayed MAY be accurate.

 

[techhead420]

It does show the intensity of the bulb slightly drops with the added CaBr2, but the beneficial output for plants is well worth it.

However, I will still settle for the MUCH cheaper Ceramic Metal Halide which has a very convincing spectrum and intensity.

I don't know what to believe, however, I do know that no matter what your books you read in University say, that of coarse with the reality of Phenomena existing, it is also possible that the LAWS you are talking about aren't fully accurate as well. Jeeze, first law of thermodynamics is flawed, so whats to say there isn't any others that are flawed.

Yes, yes, you are an engineer, and you have a lot of practical conventional experience... But you have to take into consideration that what is being displayed MAY be accurate.

BS. The first law of thermodynamics is not flawed nor in the history of science has it ever been shown to be flawed. You just made a very strong claim and it's painfully obvious that you have no formal scientific education. Give one example where the 1st law has ever been wrong.

What's being displayed is a claim of 160 lumens/watt.

Here's another sulphur lamp that simply claims >100 lumens/watt efficacy.

nlite SULPHUR PLASMA LIGHT

I wait for you to back up the claim that there is a flaw in the 1st Law of Thermodynamics.

 

[wmike82]

yes, I am clearly not a scientist or anything like that...

And well, the only example I can give you is the Joseph Newman energy machine... Of coarse, people like yourself who don't want to SEE and KNOW are the very people who I don't have the energy to argue with.

There are clearly more examples of different flaws in the unfinished 'system'. All of the proof lies within our solar system, the Sun, Jupiter's phenomena, and other universal phenomena.

 

[techhead420]

LOL, man are you for real? Joseph Newman is a religious nutball making a claim that he has not and can not back up just like every other uneducated over unity crackpot. I ask for proof and you give me this? It doesn't do much for your credibility.

The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman

I can't wait until you articulate the "proof" that lies in our solar system.

 

[Lord Dangly Bits]

You people can believe what ever you want, I rely on the science and my engineering training. As stated before, ANY ENGINEER trained in photonics, like I have been, isn't going to take claims of >500 lumens/watt seriously (it's completely laughable, you'd have to be more than 100% efficient) and it plainly shows in the table below the chart that you'll get 160 lumens/watt. quote]

I also have been educated in Engineering. I have worked with Plasma, but am not specialized in it in any form. Plasma is a amazing material. It can cut through armored steel like butter. Or it can be aimed to a fine point for truely intrecute cutting.

Hell look at Flouresent lighting. These lights save what? 40% power for the same light? if you were alive back in the 1940's or when ever they were developed, would you be calling bullshit then also?

As I said before, I just skimmed this thread, and watched one short video, but I will have an open mind on this type of light. Plasma is a material we do not truely understand. HELL!! Electricity is still a theory to man kind. We still do not undertand how it works. There is two different theries, that work from two different mathmatical formulas. There is The Hole flow Theory, and then there is the Electron flow theory. Both fomulas are totally different, but they both work in their application. I could see close to 100% efficience from a light.

But then again, I think I have the answer to comeing very close to perpetual motion.. So call me crazy.

 

[Lord Dangly Bits]

LOL, man are you for real? Joseph Newman is a religious nutball making a claim that he has not and can not back up just like every other uneducated over unity crackpot. I ask for proof and you give me this? It doesn't do much for your credibility.

The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman

I can't wait until you articulate the "proof" that lies in our solar system.

Hey Bud, I have an open mind, and I believe in a higher being and all. But i will be DAMM'D if I will click on any of those links.

 

[GAMEBRED]

I don't really care either way but techhead....You do realize that not to long ago the brightest minds in the world "KNEW" we were the center of the universe and that the world was flat lol.

 

[wmike82]

Joe Newman is definitely a religious nut ball, but his theory isn't flawed. It is unfortunate that someone would rather bash someone on a belief completely unrelated to the issue at hand then to investigate with an open mind, to be able to finally prove or disprove this 'theory'... that I should also mention has scientific backing by many in the professional scientific and mathematical field.

 

[techhead420]

Joe Newman is definitely a religious nut ball, but his theory isn't flawed. It is unfortunate that someone would rather bash someone on a belief completely unrelated to the issue at hand then to investigate with an open mind, to be able to finally prove or disprove this 'theory'... that I should also mention has scientific backing by many in the professional scientific and mathematical field.

Complete rubbish. Newman has NO backing in the scientific community just like no overunity nutball has backing in the scientific community. Why? Because they can not back their claims.

 

[wmike82]

read my title... This is why I won't spend energy on you. You are set in your ways and it is unfortunate.

I hope you are unhealthy, bald, and blaming it on your genes. Because I am intelligent, strong, and very aware of my own body phenomena, and technology and product to keep me getting better... I can say no more.

 

[techhead420]

I don't really care either way but techhead....You do realize that not to long ago the brightest minds in the world "KNEW" we were the center of the universe and that the world was flat lol.

LOL, man, you're making logical fallacy called a straw man argument. Once again, never in the history of science has any of the laws of thermodynmaics been shown to be flawed.

Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[techhead420]

read my title... This is why I won't spend energy on you. You are set in your ways and it is unfortunate.

I hope you are unhealthy, bald, and blaming it on your genes. Because I am intelligent, strong, and very aware of my own body phenomena, and technology and product to keep me getting better... I can say no more.

Wow, that's some outstanding maturity on display here....

I'm set in the ways of the scientific method which requires measurable proof, not anecdotes.

Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Lord Dangly Bits]

Hey Techead,

I understand you have an Education in Engineering, but before you can be a truely GREAT engineer, who will give mankind advances in technology, you need to know which beliefs are true proven fact, and which are true proven theories. Plasma is still a theory, so it has flaws automatically. If you want to prove that I am wrong, then why do we not move to an easier subject like Electricity? Do you think that Mankind knows how it Works? If you do, I will prove that Mankind does not understnad at all how it works, and that our formulas are then flawed.

When a subject is only a thoery, then you need to have a braod open mind, if not you are nothing more then a slave to the books you have read.

 

[wmike82]

I love you Lord Dangly Bits. We should talk (in a non-homosexual way)

 

[wmike82]

and techhead, no need to be mature... You are being completely immature about the topic at hand.

 

[techhead420]

Hey Techead,

I understand you have an Education in Engineering, but before you can be a truely GREAT engineer, who will give mankind advances in technology, you need to know which beliefs are true proven fact, and which are true proven theories. Plasma is still a theory, so it has flaws automatically. If you want to prove that I am wrong, then why do we not move to an easier subject like Electricity? Do you think that Mankind knows how it Works? If you do, I will prove that Mankind does not understnad at all how it works, and that our formulas are then flawed.

When a subject is only a thoery, then you need to have a braod open mind, if not you are nothing more then a slave to the books you have read.

Sigh....more strawman arguments. Thermodynamics is a fact and yet once again has never been shown in the history of science to be wrong. That's why we call thermodynamics a law and not a theory. For this light to be >500 lumens/watt would violate a law of thermodynamics, not a theory of plasma. You need to understand this difference and actually know what you're talking about if you're going to be making a credible argument.

I'd love to debate electricity. Fire away!