What ?
lol
lol
Light degradation -Opinions?
- Thread starter Stilletto
- Start date
ThinkAboutIt
New Member
What if I added - "Assuming all variables are equal."
Jonny
I'm pretty new to this forum. And I know this is an old thread. But I have to disagree with stilletos chart. Does the light from the Sun degrade after only a few feet away? No. I reaches further than a few feet and then catches it's optimal efficient light. In fact, the light from the Sun reaches optimal efficiency several million miles from the actual source. Why is that? Because it is much higher lumens than a standard light bulb. There for, if indeed the 1000 watt bulb chart is correct, then (in the same environment) the two 400 watt bulbs optimal efficiency point would be much closer to the actual source. If your chart is correct on both... then the dark side of the Moon should be much brighter reflecting the light from billions of Suns. Correct? Also, you must compensate the fact we are dealing with a 3D object. Which is where the movers would have the advantage. They are lighting the entire cube as opposed to a stationary light. Two 400 watt bulbs should produce optimal growing in a 3 dimensional world. Even more efficient than a single bulb with 200 more watts. However, the energy put into moving the lights would probably, combined, be equal to the stationary 1000 watt bulb. I couldn't think of this shit sober. :-D
