Yup. 5 days isn't much. Just think of all those violets that go through the mail in the total darkness of a cardboard box. And I personally have left plants in insufficient light for extended periods of time (we're talking months) and almost unwatered... I put em back in the windowsill and they just bounced right back. Now I'm not by any means encouraging such treatment (I only did this for certain plants because they were iffy and I wanted to separate them from others and wasn't sure if I wanted to keep them) and they are by no means happy... they decline and don't bloom... but they survive remarkably well. In fact, they really impressed me with their resilience. Anyway, starting their lights tomorrow should be just fine. Make sure to take care of yourself too!

An interesting find related to our discussion here: "A key part of our research involved the determination of which light frequencies or wavelengths would produce superior plant growth results." http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6921182/description.html Since LED's represent a relatively narrow band of light, as opposed to HID's or Fluoro's, the researcher's used these lights for accuracy purposes. Prior research that they found gave a broad suggested range within bands 620-680, or 700-760 nm (red) and 400-500 nm (blue). After a year and a half of research, they settled on three more specific light wavelengths that produced the best plant growth results. "660 nanometers (nm) is the wavelength that drives the engine of the photosynthetic process. The 680 nm wavelength is perhaps closer to the peak absorption wavelength of one of the two chlorophylls found in higher plants. However, at 680 nm you miss completely the absorption curve of the second chlorophyll, and furthermore the output curve of a 680 nm LED has a fair amount of light output above 700 nm, which is known to cause unwanted morphological changes to plants. LEDs of 680 nm output are also rare in the marketplace, making them relatively expensive. Our choice of a 660 nm first wavelength component is a compromise wavelength commonly used in plant growing research, which supplies energy to both types of chlorophyll without emitting enough light above 700 nm to adversely affect plant growth. The 620 nm LEDs used in the aforesaid Ignatius et al. patents, are meant to provide the light energy for photosynthesis, but a look at the absorption spectrum for the two chlorophylls shows that this wavelength falls almost entirely outside the absorption curve for chlorophyll. Our research showed better results using LEDs of 660 nm and 612 nm rather than the wavelengths of 620 nm and 680 nm. Beneficially, LEDs of 660 nm are also readily available in the market, and are very inexpensive. Our second 612 nm wavelength component was selected not to promote photosynthesis, but to match one of the peaks of the carotenoids. As noted in "Influence of UV-B irradiation on the carotenoid content of Vitis vinifera tissues," C. C. Steel and M. Keller (http://bst.portlandpress.com/bst/028/0883/bst028883.htm), "carotenoid synthesis . . . is dependent upon the wavelength of visible light, and is diminished under yellow and red filters." By providing the orange 612 nm light, we not only promote creation of carotenoids, which are required for plant health, but also add a little to photosynthesis, since the carotenoids pass their absorbed energy to chlorophyll. Carotenoids are required for plant health due to their ability to absorb destructive free radicals, both from solar damage and from chlorophyll production, whose precursors will damage plant tissue in the absence of the carotenoids. During research we found that, beneficially, test plants turned a deeper green, i.e. produced more chlorophyll, with the addition of our 612 nm light component. This ability to increase a plant's chlorophyll content with this specific light wavelength is an important aspect of our invention. Blue light of about 465 nm, this wavelength being non-critical, is strongly absorbed by most of the plant pigments, but is preferably included as the third component in our lamp to support proper photomorphogenesis, or plant development. Any LED near this wavelength will work as well, but the 470 nm LEDs are commonly available and less expensive than many other blue LEDs. Regarding the proper proportion for each wavelength, it is known, from independent laboratory research, that a blue/red proportion of 6-8% blue to red is optimal. In sunlight the blue/red light proportion is about 30%, but this is not required by plants. More than 8% blue light provides no additional benefit, but adds to the cost of the device since blue LEDs are among the most expensive to manufacture. In our device we include about 8% blue light, which is near optimal for plant development while offering the greatest cost savings. Our research showed that best results were obtained when the output of the 612 nm orange LEDs in our device was added to the output of the 660 nm red LEDs when calculating our most desired blue/red proportion."

Oh this is so nice!! Summerfield, I just LOVE, LOVE all the details in your drawings! I love the exterior molding, lighting placements, and how you have the arches in the brick area under the back porch! Theses are things I wouldn't have thought of.. all the little details! I have studied and studied everything you have given me (THANK YOU AGAIN!) and plan on incorporating all the little tweaks on the first floor you have improved on with one exception, the laundry room. I really like your set-up better in someways, and less expensive with less cabinets, but wonder if I'll miss that outside window and more countertop space? Do you see any other suggestions in this area? Also, wondering about the size of the island in the kitchen, you have it much shorter than what the kitchen designer(s) were going to use, and would love your thoughts and reasons on the shorter island. Upstairs.. I really was looking for much less, something we could just close off someday, but this matches the feel for the downstairs, and I just LOVE IT! I have struggled over this upstairs now for months, and our "fired" designer just came up with nothing to offer..., just boring layouts. I can't find a single thing I dislike! What do you come up with in regards to square footage main floor and 2nd floor? My design program was showing the downstairs to be about 1995 sq ft, but our "fired" designer calculations were much higher (over 2230 sq. ft)

Thurman, I've read your story for a few years now. I've told you this in the past, its obvious throughout the years and the issues both you and your sd have had with one another resentment has built on both sides. Your side of the coin hasn't changed. You want respect and you want control over your household. Your sd now is an adult woman, 30 years old. How you want respect and how you go about wanting to control your household cannot be applied to this adult the way you wanted it all these years. You dont like her one bit and this is why you pick at everything she does. the lightbulb, the flashlight...etc... She didn't listen toyou back then because of her mom and now that she is an adult , she definitely knows she doesn't need or want your permission. In her mind, this is her mother house too and since her relationship is strained with you and has resentment, she is not going to ask you permission for anything. She knows you want power over and she as an adult will never give it to you. You as a person have to let go...sorry, i know the many years of stacked bullsh*t, you really can't stand her...but, i blame your wife, not your sd for her actions. Cause mommy had her back and its obvious. You chose to stay in this marriage all these years. She doesn't live with you.....so to have to deal with her a few times out of the year is not bad. If its so bad to you thurman, keep yourself busy and out of each others hairs.