I've always had a thing for naughty photons.
Anyone Thinking of Dumping LEDS and going back to Halides
- Thread starter Goldcoastreefs
- Start date
Unlike LEDs are bad and MH/T5s are good?
A photon in a given energy state is a photon in a given energy state. It does not know or care what it came from. Blue light at 450 nm is blue light at 450 nm. Light/photons do not take on additional properties depending on their source.
There is nothing inherently better or worse about photons created by MH, T5 or LED.
This is the point nynick has tried to make repeatedly and I've been having fun with.
d2mini
Premium Member
I don't think anybody argued that.
But i don't know of a MH or T5 that anyone uses that ONLY puts out a single spectrum of light (like 450 nm).
There are many simpleton arguments for sure. To me, the "photon is a photon" was one of the worst ever mentioned. Sanjay had these words in a article years ago and people assumed that the lights were equal in aggregate and never bothered to check out the other properties that matter like, most importantly, spectrum. It was silly for people to not do their own homework, but it happened. These type of over generalizations, especially with tricky words, can do more harm that good.
Lately, the phrase has been used as a suckers argument for those looking to "take a step back to the science" from supposed anecdotal deficiencies and also for people just to argue. I need to decide which one of those that I am. I do know that I will take the anecdotal most of the time when coming from those with experiences.
I hate to contribute to this suckers argument even more, but nobody is even sure if a photon from one light source is actually the same as from another. A photon is a quantum of possibly infinite things. In your example of the 450nm, the spectrum might be the same, but the intensity, fractioning ability, and many other characteristics of the quantum could be totally different. Anybody here an actual Quantum Field Theorist and not just stay in a Holiday Inn Express? Anybody have access to a Particle Collandar (or whatever they are called) in their basement? I doubt that anybody knows... and if they do, they should have been spending their time and multi-million dollar equipment on more important things than this. Should we at least amend this suckers argument to say "spectrum is spectrum" instead of a "photon is a photon?" Then, add in "spectrum with the same intensity is spectrum with the same intensity. That gets more of the way there. Perhaps then add in "spectrum with the same intensity and delivery is the same as spectrum with the same intensity and delivery." After you add in enough real variables to make a comparison worthwhile we can arrive and the conclusion that any quantum should really not be compared to another.
Lately, the phrase has been used as a suckers argument for those looking to "take a step back to the science" from supposed anecdotal deficiencies and also for people just to argue. I need to decide which one of those that I am. I do know that I will take the anecdotal most of the time when coming from those with experiences.
I hate to contribute to this suckers argument even more, but nobody is even sure if a photon from one light source is actually the same as from another. A photon is a quantum of possibly infinite things. In your example of the 450nm, the spectrum might be the same, but the intensity, fractioning ability, and many other characteristics of the quantum could be totally different. Anybody here an actual Quantum Field Theorist and not just stay in a Holiday Inn Express? Anybody have access to a Particle Collandar (or whatever they are called) in their basement? I doubt that anybody knows... and if they do, they should have been spending their time and multi-million dollar equipment on more important things than this. Should we at least amend this suckers argument to say "spectrum is spectrum" instead of a "photon is a photon?" Then, add in "spectrum with the same intensity is spectrum with the same intensity. That gets more of the way there. Perhaps then add in "spectrum with the same intensity and delivery is the same as spectrum with the same intensity and delivery." After you add in enough real variables to make a comparison worthwhile we can arrive and the conclusion that any quantum should really not be compared to another.
power boat jim
Well-known member
That is not true in my case, I ran metal halide for years and when I switched of to LEDs coral remained basically unchanged colorwise. I will say My 180 was run by 1200w of MH at the time. So switching to LEDs for me was probably not the shock that some others may have experienced. I was able to run my sols at around 70% from the beginning with no problems.
I added the full spectrum lights since I could not grow a millie or do very well with dragons. Well the 3 months of halide helped the millie but did nothing for the dragons. So its not the lights in every case.
The par readings with the sols alone are about 950 at the top of the tank and 350 to 400 at the bottom. These were taken 3 years ago with the lights lower to the tank then I run them now.
You cannot make judgement about every tank from only the ones you have seen. Thats guilt by association:spin3: I have seen several LED lit tanks around here that are every bit as colored up as a MH tank. Dont expect to see them post here though they gave up trying to prove their point long ago.
MedRed
Active member
Who knows what else is going on in your tank in regards to chemistry, stability, and husbandry. Without me being able to evaluate your situation, I'll chalk up your results as outlying. I've seen plenty of photographic evidence, the vivid experiment, and my own results to believe otherwise. Maybe one day LEDs will color corals like MH and T5 do. It's not today.
Khemul
New member
For some corals, this is entirely true. For instance, I can grow Kenya Trees under just about any form of light. They don't care what spectrum their light comes in, they just care that they get light (and even then, they don't care all that much...). But people who switch from LED to MH aren't trying to grow Kenya Trees. They are trying to grow SPS that have specific coloring and growth patterns based on a MH bulb.
The problem with the "photon is a photon" concept is that people aren't talking about photons when it comes to MH vs LED. They are talking about spectrum and light spread. The amount of light coming from a LED or MH fixture may or may not be equal, depending on the fixture. Assuming we are talking about quality fixture though, it probably is. The spectrum and light spread is most definitely not the same though. It isn't even equal across different LED fixtures. It may be extremely similar with some LED fixtures. Maybe even so close as to be not noticeable (hence why we do have enough success stories for people to point and say "look! it worked for that person!'). But it can also be so far off that the corals change appearance completely over time. So much variation. In some ways, it isn't even fair to compare them because "LED" could be anything from a Kessil to a Marineland fixture, design-wise. Whereas just about all MH are going to be the same, with minor variations for reflector or bulb.
power boat jim
Well-known member
TheSOLs are stock and are running 40/70/72 and have been for a while. They are bout three years old now. I can also say that two local fish store owners ask me for frags every now and then for their personal tanks. I take that as a compliment since they certainly have a bunch they could choose from.
When someone writes something like "I used LED for a year and the colour just wasn't there so I went back to MH" it is such a generic statement that it is difficult to know just what they are saying the problem is. Those arguements, taken in agregate, imply that there is something different about LED vs MH or T5.
Spectrum is a solvable problem.
Yup. Over time manufacturers will narrow it down to a formula (combination of leds and intensities) that will deliver the same results as MH or T5.
Well then, I'll just run down to Home Depot and pick up an off the shelf MH bulb for $34 bucks and I should be good.
Or did you mean that you can pick up a bulb from multiple vendors that will work out of the box? There is a big difference between those two statements.
Is LED 'there' yet? Depends on what you mean by there. Is there a gold standard you can buy from more than one vendor, set and forget? No, we are not there yet.
Can you set up an led system that can grow corals with the same colouration as MH? Unless Powerboat Jim is fibbing, we are there now.
Khemul
New member
Well then, I'll just run down to Home Depot and pick up an off the shelf MH bulb for $34 bucks and I should be good.
Well, a photon is a photon, right? :lmao:
:lmao:
:lmao:
Bpb
New member
Lol a photon is a photon. Yes. While this was made in jest...
Let's remember that a "beam" of light is polyenergetic. Many photons of many different energies. Some beneficial for photosynthesis, some useless, some harmful. A photon is a photon, yes but not all photons are created equally. Some are stopped by heavy gas particles, others can penetrate layers of concrete and kill complex life by destroying DNA at it's very molecular bonds.
Let's remember that a "beam" of light is polyenergetic. Many photons of many different energies. Some beneficial for photosynthesis, some useless, some harmful. A photon is a photon, yes but not all photons are created equally. Some are stopped by heavy gas particles, others can penetrate layers of concrete and kill complex life by destroying DNA at it's very molecular bonds.
MedRed
Active member
Powerboat Jim is the definitive answer on nothing at the moment.
Mikefromaz
New member
Sinularia turned a rose pink from dog brown and grew from four inches to ten. Armor of God palys glow like cigarettes in a dark room and tripled the number of polyps. Green favia is so bright there are times it is hard to look at. Zoos looking good and growing like weeds. Duncan polyps the size of half dollars from four to eight in six weeks. Light source ...... Reefbreeders Photon 120w. LED fixture with sun intensity mimicking the hour of the day. White leds set 25% higher than blue. Same tank previously lit by 96w. PC. I am sure MH lights " rock". I dont need 'em.
Bpb
New member
I figured it was a joke in context. And I understand that 450 nm is 450 nm no matter where it comes from.
However I do agree there are people on here (from both camps) that DONT understand. I for one believe a correctly designed led fixture can grow and color all manner of corals. I've seen enough evidence in person. That being said, I agree that too many options hinder effectiveness because user error is too much an issue. This coming from an all time T5 user that is in the process of switching to metal halides.
However I do agree there are people on here (from both camps) that DONT understand. I for one believe a correctly designed led fixture can grow and color all manner of corals. I've seen enough evidence in person. That being said, I agree that too many options hinder effectiveness because user error is too much an issue. This coming from an all time T5 user that is in the process of switching to metal halides.
kevin_austin
New member
Although I'm a big fan of LEDs, I can certainly understand that there may be spectrum differences and the community may not have come to the point where they "know" which type of LED to use. Certainly there are successes and failures. This could be do to spectrum, intensity, or just corals that are used to one type of light (same photons, different frequency and amplitude
) over another.I can remember reading a post many years ago. The gist of it was that a reefer was noticing that his tank with the 20K metal halide bulb was growing much less algae and doing just as well as the tank with the Ushio 6500K bulb. Heresy, you say! Well, he noticed it, and then other people noticed it, and so on, and we now know what the best type of metal halide bulb to use is.
I don't think we are quite there yet (to that degree) with LEDs. My prediction is that you are going to see folks removing their optics and trying to get a much greater spread than they are now. This, along with spectrum improvements will get the same results as metal halides. And, of course, efficiencies continue to rise in LEDs, so we might see a move towards less wattage, but more LEDs, rather than more wattage with less, again, increasing light dispersal and filling in all those shadows, while not nuking corals with laserbeams of light.
Having said all that, LEDs do grow corals. That is obvious from the examples presented and they have many great features not available anywhere else. The price, of course my be the best selling point (is that a pun) of any.
I'm positive that LEDs (or some new technology) will replace metal halide in the fairly near future. This is because metal halides are cumbersome, throw off a lot of heat, and are viewed by many new reefers as being much more challenging to understand and use as opposed to a T5 or LED fixture that they can just plop on top of their tank and not worry about it melting. Metal halides will continue to be used by the die hard reefer, but will shrink in overall usage (think film or vinyl).
However, when they happens exactly, I can't say for certain.
Similar threads
