Cold Cathode Lighting

you're a stupid filthy poo poo dum dum head clektro. you're also wrong for now, so go away.

thanks for enlightening me

surely you will agree that there is most definitely a difference between logic and results, correct? even the most seemingly infallible logic has been shown to be faulty on its premise from time to time. grow some fucking weed with these ccfl's and actually prove yourself with results. that's what we're all waiting on. all i want is to see you grow some weed with just ccfl's. i want to see how well it grows, if at all, so that we as growers can decide whether this technology is worth the investment. logic rarely sways the masses. results do. even you should know this.

in theory, led's should be growing killer buds with ultimate efficiency which would justify the upfront investment. logic dictates that a targeted wavelength would make led's more effective than HID's using less electricity. i have yet to see one led grow that convinces me that they are capable of replacing HID's. you described ccfl's as led's on steroids. so grow some weed with them and show us. that's not a difficult request. so far as i'm concerned, led's and ccfl's are just pretty lights. please, prove me wrong by growing killer buds with them.

thanks for not being such a prick. obviously i'll post the grow as soon as supplies arrive and everything's assembled. There may be other roadblocks as they may not even end up being the perfect wavelength which would severely affect the grow. i can't prove anything while i'm waiting.

But one more thing: i'm not against results. I use a 400 W HPS system now and loved how much I harvested for my first time. But I've read enough about alternative light to be attracted by logic to test it out. Again and again I have corrected you: I never said they worked better at growing weed than HID's. I have said that the data makes them worth trying and that in theory their growing capability should exceed a 400 W system in emitted lumens (at those specific wavelengths, if the emitted wavelengths are correct which i haven't tested yet) and therefore, based on your logic, should drive photosynthesis better and grow an even healthier plant. I think it's logical to make those conclusions from the evidence, and you want to attack my logic and say it's wrong to infer before the fact??? Would you enter a project like this without having extensively researched led lighting or do you just piss away money as much as I apparently love to?

You're ridiculing me in the name of proof because you put claims into my mouth, attacked me for allegedly saying them and then demanding proof on behalf of them before I even have the system as a tactic to discredit my logic, which you still haven't even dabbled your finger in. You don't believe it's possible because it hasn't happened before, because you would have already heard about it blah blah blah. Meet me on a theoretical level here or leave it alone... you can comment on the grow all you want, but you at least have to wait until it's set up.

donnie,

His theory is sound except for it is not the lumens that we need to match.

Keep in mind, I am learning about this too in the past week I have done alot of research regarding this topic so I might throw around a couple terms that are slightly off base but the general idea conveyed should be 100% correct.

Think about it from the perspective of what we know doesn't work. Imagine 600watts of HPS and how many ever watts it takes for incandescent light bulb to put out 95,000 lumens. Which one will outperform the other and why?

High Pressure Sodium is closer to the wavelengths that we want however the Spectral Power Distribution(SPD) peaks in the Orange color. We want peaks in the Red(~640nm) and Blue (~460nm) for the basic operations of the plant.

Also, because you double the lumens by adding a second HPS doesn't mean the lumen count is what you should gauge your efficiency by. By doubling your lumen count you are also doubling the photons that plants use receptors for to convert to usable energy. Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density(PPFD) is how we should measure the efficiency of our lights.

-pot

i never once emphatically stated that you were wrong. i merely stated that according to the currently available evidence (which there is very little of at this time), there is no proof that ccfl's are going to be replacing hid's any time soon. again, i say that logic is one thing, but results are another. i am not disagreeing with you. my point is now, and has always been that there has not been enough research into this subject one way or the other. i'm all about progress and new technology. if you start a grow with these things, i will be the first to subscribe to the thread.

I'm just giving him a hard time. I've never seen any hard evidence on the effectiveness of LEDs in growing situations so naturally I'm skeptical. If he wants to do it then fine, but he comes off very arrogant about it. So until he proves me wrong I'm just going to point and laugh.

first time grower here, but I am actually implementing this now, I just happened to stumble upon this thread to see if theyll actually work, and from what I read, they just might. I'm not a serious grower, so I'll make my plant the guinea pig. It's in a lockbox with 2 cold cathodes about 5 inches away from the plant. Also, the lights I have for some reason make UV reactive things light up more, which I havent seen in other cathodes, so maybe they're emitting UV rays? I'll admit I know VERY little about growing, but this seems like a very good way to keep it from my parents.

sooo...whatever happened to this?

Hello all, I have been reading over some posts and find them very interesting. Hopefully i will be able to contribute.

What is the typical height the lamps are kept from plants? What would the standard power consumption be for a typical grow room. What if a cathode tube could be produced where all the un-necessary light has been removed from the phosphor and in a fixture where the average lifespan of the tube would be say 30 -40K hours. (can also possibly be solar powered.)
I have been working on something for a few months and it's coming down to the proto type stages and need some added info.

Please follow this link to a research paper concerning the use of CCFL (cold cathode) lighting in plant propogation by:

~~Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Applied Biological Science, Kagawa University, Miki-cho, Japan~~


CCFL's will grow plants. As with any light the spectrum is very important. Good thing they come in different colors.

I hear the same complaints about LED's. LED's will also grow plants. Provided you've got enough radiated power in the proper frequency band you could grow plants in many different types of light technology.

There is nothing to fear or hate about new tech. Make your own mind up. But at least be open to new ideas and look at it objectively.

Can we get over all the hating on each other's technology and support whatever "crazy ideas" others might have. Who knows, someone here might just discover the next great thing.

And this is also a reallllly old post but unfortunately for JohnnyAppleSeed1969's last ditch effort to not look like a complete dick, a guy on the forums uses 2 really high output LED's to grow some killer buds but apparently just for veg. So someone has done it with the less powerfull versions on weed plants. And the Japs are now doing it with the "LED steroid" Cold Cathode. But as read in this article if this technology can get researched more then we could actually change the light spectrum of our lights, making them better than any HID, LED, CFL, any kind of synthetic lighting systems because they are apparently more efficient and better target growth spectrum's than just lighting the place but for now im just sticking to whats working and readily available and that's CFL's and HID's

FilthyFletch said:

Im game if these can be shown to grow as effective as a 600 watt enhanced spectrum hps digital light while using a major amount less electricity. There are a few led ganja grows on youtube but the reslts were pretty disappointing for the time and cost to create a setup with so many red and blue leds but If someone was to make the light sell it for comproable price and gurantee its low energy usage ie make an equvilent cold cathode that grew as good as 600 watt lights and use a 1/3 the energy with same results Id listen as longas the price was under $175 for each setup as thats more then a 600 watt digital setup.

Click to expand...

i just have to ask, where do you get a 600 watt digital setup for $175?

please give me that link if you get some spare time.

not sure if you were serious or trying to make a point. or are you just talking ballast, or just bulb and hood, or......

as far as new technology goes..... imo, the many breeders out there that do this day after day would be doing testing on this if it were even close to an alternative to hid.

when you see someone other than a small home grower utilize these new technologies then you know it may be a viable option.

most breeders have unlimted money to try the latest and greatest, and i just think that they are going to be the true test, not the small scale home grower. v

Well it's obviously a massive worldwide conspiracy by cooltube manufacturers to keep effective cool lighting from reaching the mass market. Those bastards.

LMAO.....you may have a point

Yah thats why I ended it with the fact that were still going to stick with what we know works. As we know these Japanese people are growing super hard to grow plants with these lights and apparently they are better than HID's because they target only the light rays that chlorophyll uses but obviously they aren't cheap enough yet... and yes please show me this link the only 600w LED systems I can find are well over $1000...

its been done- http://www.marijuanapassion.com/forum/showthread.php/18128-AlienBait-Tries-Cold-Cathode-Lights

bump!!!!! I am very curious. how did all of this turn out. any more evidence on CCFLS?