gone solar
- Thread starter hobogato
- Start date
sfsuphysics
Active member
Someone asked a question, a few people answered, looking at what was said I really don't get what's "stupid" about it.
Yes, and if you notice, this thread is less than one month old, I don't think it's too much to question some things that might be going on, or which could make them better, or ways to can modify it and still get it to work.
Seems to me like you're telling everyone to shut up, and post more pictures basically.
GoBigOrGoHome
New member
PAR= light intensity when you are talking about the same kind of light. Halogen bulbs can sometimes burn brighter and more intense than Metal Halide bulbs, but Halogens have NO PAR. Therefore, Par is not equal to light intensity.
Also, Hobogato, that is interesting that the shimmer actually increases light intensity in some areas. I could see that if the light hits a wave at just the right spot, the light could be magnified, but only in that one spot. The fact that it is intensified overall is interesting to me... just another one of those reasons why nature knows better, I guess!
The one foot extensions.... how far from the water did you say that made the tubes?? 16"?
Jgoal55
Active member
guys seriously...stop the bickering and let a thread be a thread. 13 page threads will always go in all kinds of directions....someone asked a legit question and a little side debate opened up about it. Not once was anyone disrespectful or tasteless until someone called someone stupid which was childish. This is Ace's awesome thread so let's let him tell us when he thinks it's being hijacked or taken away from what he wants to accomplish by sharing all this hard work and research with us. It is no one else's place to do that.
I get an email every time someone responds to this thread an I'd rather not click on it only to see bickering. Cmon, we're more mature than that I hope. Let this thread get back to it's original point which is Solatubes and using natural sunlight to light your aquarium.
I get an email every time someone responds to this thread an I'd rather not click on it only to see bickering. Cmon, we're more mature than that I hope. Let this thread get back to it's original point which is Solatubes and using natural sunlight to light your aquarium.
hobogato
New member
no, it isnt brighter overall - it looks the same over all whether there is shimmer or not. the bright areas of the shimmer are much brighter. multiply halide shimmer (250 watters are what i am comparing to) by at least 3X to get the a brightness of the shimmer.
yes, the tube is 16" abouve the water, the bottom of the bell extension is 12" above the water.
yes, the tube is 16" abouve the water, the bottom of the bell extension is 12" above the water.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
Well, this is something I do want to make sure is corrected, so sorry for the sidetrack. If it takes more than just this, maybe a seperate thread, but I hope not.
PAR = a raw measure of photons w/o any weight or 'scaling' of different spectrums. One photon of red = one photon of blue. This is the radiometric scale.
Lux/Lumens/etc = based on the photometric scale. This is based on PAR really, but more weight is given to green, then blue spectrums, and not so much given to blue. This 'scaling' is based on what our eyes see, as in, how bright we see a light. Simply put, a blue light may seem dimmer than a red/green one because our eyes dont pick up blue as well.
At that, PAR is PAR regardless of the light. Halogens do have a PAR... its just more red-green spectrums and less blue. A 3000K halide is going to seem alot brighter than a 10,000K of the same PAR to our eyes, but the 'light intensity' is still there. Sure, a 3000K and 10,000K bulb might have the same PAR, but the 3000K will most likely have more 'Lux', but light is still light. If you have two halogens of the same spectrum, and one is 'brighter' than the other, that one will also have more PAR.
I dont know what exactly you are trying to say here... but I want to make sure everyone understands, including you. Halogen lights have a 'PAR'... anything that makes light does, including IR and UV sometimes, but still, a Halogen has PAR. True, as far as our eyes are concerned, the bluer light might look duller, but that is of little consequence... the bottom line is that PPFD or PAR IS LIGHT INTENSITY, and as far as our corals are concerned, the radiometric scale matters more than 'how bright we see it'.
The radiometric and photometric scales are just two different ways to measure light intensity, but to say that they arent all related isnt true. PAR is the most pure way to measure light intensity... the way to measure without bias for how our eyes see it. Every light though, regardless of spectrum, has a PAR related to the intensity of its output.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
The water doesnt 'make' more light. It bends it. It bends light to converge in some areas, and spread out in others at the same time. The average light is still the same as if there was no shimmer. Its just how the light is being directed. Think of the water surface as a large reflector (it is a lens) that is concentrating light in some areas and spreading it out (shade) in others, and constantly moving. That being said, the intensity and frequency of the 'shimmer' depends on the surface of the water. Waves in the water are determined mostly by the size of the water surface (propigation of resonant frequencies)... a longer/larger tank will have much slower waves, and therefore shimmer, compared to a smaller tank. Direct water agitation (pump outlets) is another way to make the light 'flicker', but its often at such a fast rate that the shimmer is too fast to notice. The amount of increase and decrease in intensity from the 'shimmer' depends only on the amount that the water surface is 'bent'. If you are able to create dramatic waves, like where the water surface reaches an angle of 45 degrees for instance, you will see huge concentrations and shadows from any light source. If you dont have huge waves, but rather long ones that dont slope so much at the surface, the water wont be as dramatic of a lens. Thats all it is based on.
hobogato
New member
you are correct - kinda like a kid burning an ant with a hand lens 
someone else mentioned that the prismatic effect of bending the light also brought out spectrum of the wavelengths present, so since the spectrum with sunlight has more yellow and red than halides, it probably looks more intense to my eyes.
the waves on the surface of my tank are unchanged from when i had halides, but the shimmer is much more dramatic - probably a combination of the higher PAR (i really need to get a meter and measure it) and the spectral differences of the sunlight and halides.
someone else mentioned that the prismatic effect of bending the light also brought out spectrum of the wavelengths present, so since the spectrum with sunlight has more yellow and red than halides, it probably looks more intense to my eyes.
the waves on the surface of my tank are unchanged from when i had halides, but the shimmer is much more dramatic - probably a combination of the higher PAR (i really need to get a meter and measure it) and the spectral differences of the sunlight and halides.
jthao
Super Saiyan
ace..... amazing!!!!! now that's what I'm talking about!!!
it's nice to see people in this hobby trying new things. I love it when people try things that others haven't, its people like you that we all have the internet/cell phones/etc...etc.... now. I just wished I had $1300 to try this on my tank. here in Ca we get quite a bit of sunlight so it might just work.
thanks for sharing your idea/ lighting set up with us, it's a big inspiration to a lot of us. keep up the good work and ideas.
it's nice to see people in this hobby trying new things. I love it when people try things that others haven't, its people like you that we all have the internet/cell phones/etc...etc.... now. I just wished I had $1300 to try this on my tank. here in Ca we get quite a bit of sunlight so it might just work.
thanks for sharing your idea/ lighting set up with us, it's a big inspiration to a lot of us. keep up the good work and ideas.
The_Browns
New member
Definitly Amazing. The only thing is the Yellow color of the natural light. I think the lighting from the MH was much nicer.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13378294#post13378294 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hobogato
you are correct - kinda like a kid burning an ant with a hand lens
someone else mentioned that the prismatic effect of bending the light also brought out spectrum of the wavelengths present, so since the spectrum with sunlight has more yellow and red than halides, it probably looks more intense to my eyes.
the waves on the surface of my tank are unchanged from when i had halides, but the shimmer is much more dramatic - probably a combination of the higher PAR (i really need to get a meter and measure it) and the spectral differences of the sunlight and halides.
In nature, you might be talking about the difference between 'skylight' and 'sunlight', and how they penetrate the water. Skylight is the light that the atmosphere scatters and changes into that blue color. Sunlight is the light that still comes directly from that yellow ball in the sky. If you have halides that are 10,000Kish with a few strips of blue or actinic linear lamps, you might see something very similar to this in your own tank. Yes, the sunlight is more intense than the skylight, but it isnt always there. The closest think I could compare it to is when I had my 120g running with 4 rows of T5s and a single 250 watt halide on a light rail... the moving 'sunlight' reminded me of when diving and seeing that patch of sunlight that comes down through the clouds and makes a beam of yellow light in an otherwise blue sea. Also, there is something to be said for how the water itself filters out the light due to depth. Maybe not in our tanks so much because they arent deep enough, but in nature the water contributes to this 'sealight' effect. This 'blue' is less intense... it has to be because its been filtered, refracted, diffused, etc, and the sunlight is a beam direct from the source in comparison. But the sunlight isnt a 'constant'.
hobogato
New member
ya lost me on that one. 
i am talking about the light that comes in when the sun is above the tubes and almost shines directly down the tubes to the water - between 12 and 4. from 10:30 to 12 and from 4 to 6:30 there is still shimmer, but it looks more like the shimmer that existed with the halides.
i am talking about the light that comes in when the sun is above the tubes and almost shines directly down the tubes to the water - between 12 and 4. from 10:30 to 12 and from 4 to 6:30 there is still shimmer, but it looks more like the shimmer that existed with the halides.
serpentman
part time superhero
He guys, I hate to be nitpicky on the whole PAR debate. However, I respectfully disagree with notion that PAR directly translates to Light intensity.
PAR, by definition, is "Photosynthetically Available Radiation", or light in the range of 400-700nm. Although visible light falls in this range, that is not the intention of this measurement. Without consideration to photosynthesis, either by terrestrial plants, zooanthellae, algae, etc, it is a useless value.
Light intensity in the traditional sense is more correctly measured in lumens which is the unit of measurement of luminous flux or a measure of perceived power of light by the human eye across the visible light spectrum. Basically its measurement of the amount of all available visible light. And finally Lux is perceived visible light intensity that hits a given surface.
Granted, for our purposes in the hobby, PAR is the ultimate goal and is really what should be concentrated on. Although a technicality, PAR really does not really equal light intensity but rather intensity that is experienced by corals, or more specifically zooanthellae.
Given the natural source of energy provided by solar radiation, my bet is the solar tubes actually provide a greater source of PAR across the available light spectrums. Manmade lights although handy, struggle to effectively hit the entire spectrum. Given the available energy, they must specialize at a specific frequency, often at the expense of other areas of the spectrum.
PAR, by definition, is "Photosynthetically Available Radiation", or light in the range of 400-700nm. Although visible light falls in this range, that is not the intention of this measurement. Without consideration to photosynthesis, either by terrestrial plants, zooanthellae, algae, etc, it is a useless value.
Light intensity in the traditional sense is more correctly measured in lumens which is the unit of measurement of luminous flux or a measure of perceived power of light by the human eye across the visible light spectrum. Basically its measurement of the amount of all available visible light. And finally Lux is perceived visible light intensity that hits a given surface.
Granted, for our purposes in the hobby, PAR is the ultimate goal and is really what should be concentrated on. Although a technicality, PAR really does not really equal light intensity but rather intensity that is experienced by corals, or more specifically zooanthellae.
Given the natural source of energy provided by solar radiation, my bet is the solar tubes actually provide a greater source of PAR across the available light spectrums. Manmade lights although handy, struggle to effectively hit the entire spectrum. Given the available energy, they must specialize at a specific frequency, often at the expense of other areas of the spectrum.
Last edited:
