[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APD] watt/gallon rule
Sorry for the SPAM, but I broke the response in two because it would
have been a huge long message.
Thomas Barr wrote:
> Add that to a huge number of bulbs types from all over the planet, well, we are really starting to get way out from a practical study that is "standard".
Ya. There are a lot of bulbs out there. I guess we shouldn't try to come
up with any useful standard for assessing their value in the aquarium.
It's too much work. Let's all go to the movies instead.
> Why not?
Umm. Are you seriously asking why you can't compare things without using
> We have for years using w/gal.
What does that mean? Just because it works doesn't mean it's the best.
You could just as easily tell someone that they need X watts per pound
of gravel and it would probably work. Plants have a wide tolerance
range. What that probably won't get you is something that *accurately*
predicts something near the *true* minimum required. That is the whole
point of a theory - to make accurate predictions.
>>Measuring is the basis
>>of all empirical knowledge, and without measurement there is no real way
>>to apply the knowledge to a new and unique situation.
> Really? Are you sure you want to go with this one?
Yes. If you do not compare X to Y (which is measuring), how are you
going to draw any conclusions about X or Y?
> It would take a long time to investigate the differences with each issue
Yes, but "it will be hard" is not a valid reason to shun investigation IMHO.
This is getting dragged *WAY* off topic. The whole point was to
investigate whether watts per gallon is the best we can come up with. I
have met no end of opposition to this idea of testing the established
"knowledge." I know sometimes people are opposed to exploring the
veracity of beliefs they have held for years, but I am not one of those
people. I truly apologize to anyone if investigating the watts per
gallon rule offends them or makes them uncomfortable enough to make an
attempt at discouraging it.
If somebody wants to offer empirical evidence that watts per gallon is
the most accurate predictor we can come up with, based on the knowledge
we have available to us (mainly whatever information is usually on light
bulbs), of the actual requirements then I'm all ears. I'm not interested
in debating with people about whether or not they want to know the result.
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com