Lermer is correct. Even a quick google search will reveal hundreds of peer-reviewed papers on blue light's effect on plants. It's no myth at all. Here's a random example. They took Scots pine seedlings and put them in plexiglass containers, one designed to remove blue light and the other completely clear. I.e., the ones missing blue light got less total light to them; however, they grew *longer* than the ones in the fully transparent plexiglass. I could point to countless more examples of this phenomenon. Blue = stocky and leafy. Red = spindly, encourages fruiting. Right now Southern California Edison is subsidizing the cost of a plain jane looking four foot fluorescent light fixtures so they sell for $1.99 each. Purchase cost isn't the only consideration. Power is generally a bigger cost than upfront costs. Think about drawing 450W for a HID on an 18/6 day/night cycle year-round -- that's 3,000kWh, or $325 a year at average electricity rates. That's no chump change. :P so I decided to try some 225 mixed LED's for some seedlings as I have read about some success with this 14 watt setup, unfortunately the results were less than spectacular, albeit the plants did grow, and did not stretch I still got 2x the growth from the Fluoro in half the time. I cannot comment to the scientific explanation, but It appears that 14 watt LED over 1sq foot is not enough power to really drive growth, Well, obviously ;) LEDs are nice, but they're not magical. The sun on a clear day puts down about 93 watts per square foot (times the sine of the angle to the sun -- if it's straight overhead, times 1.0). Even if your LEDs were 100% efficient, which they're not (for blue, probably a quantum efficiency in the 40%s) that'd still be 15% of the energy of sun shining directly overhead. In practice, factoring into account inefficiencies and light straying from where you intended to illuminate, you're probably getting under 5% of the light of the sun. Now, you get to pick your ideal frequencies, (the graph at the bottom is what you want to look at). But that isn't nearly enough of a boost to compensate for how little light you're putting out. If you want to drive growth, you don't need to double your light; you should at least 4x it. And be sure to minimize any stray light that you can :) Also, as the plants get bigger, penetration will become an issue. LEDs are effectively point light sources; there's nearly no penumbra. The more reflections you can get and the deeper the LEDs are into the canopy (and the more they move, if that's an option), the better your results will be. I'm about to try an experiment with dangling LED christmas lights through my planters to see how they like that.

I did that exactly, ellessebee. I have the 240V OTR Advantium mounted above the counter. I also have 15" wall cabinets so it fits and works like a charm. I don't think there are any differences in the cooking features between the wall oven and OTR models. The oven cavity is pretty big, because I can fit a half sheet. There are two considerations you need to keep in mind. 1. The OTR does need to vent, because it performs a cooling function after using the non-MW functions. I have mine blow out the front, above the door. In hindsight, I would have run some duct up and over to the adjacent rangehood. 2. The door needs and extra inch of clearance on the hinge side (left) to open. When the contractor first installed it, the whole unit was flush with the cabinet and looked awesome. He was so proud of himself, as was I. I went to use it later and couldn't open the door. It also blocked the exhaust in the front. He had to come back and reinstall it by tacking 2x4s (actually measured 1.5x3.5) to the back wall and then installing it. Now it all works beautifully, while taking a slight hit in the aesthetics. Another benefit to mounting the OTR model OTC is that the underside is heat and moisture resistant. So my coffee maker has a permanent home under there where I don't have to worry about the steam damaging the undersides of the cabinet. Oh, and the built in light of the OTR serves as task lighting for the area underneath. So I also saved money on lighting there. This post was edited by jscout on Mon, Jan 28, 13 at 13:26

Gudang, a lot of people here on this forum started with a heavy dense soil mix, often with compost and other soil components - because that is what is commonly available. Then they noticed that their plants are start to suffer at one point and came here for advise. Al (Tapla) has relentlessly taught the concept for better soil mix, fertilizing, pruning, repotting and many other topics. Most made an effort to follow in his foot steps and found his teachings to be invaluable and succeeded in keeping their plants flourishing. In short, he has a lot of credibility here. Not only that they have subsequently helped others because they understood the concept that no book can offer. Whereas you have yet to offer sound advice with evidence of success. First you have to build and establish your credibility - show your work and explain not only what but also how and why. For example, terms like less porous and more porous does not make any sense - more or less compared to what?

I was the oldest of six and my parents couldn't afford orthodontics when I was a kid (younger sibs got teeth straightened but not me). I had an eye tooth on top that never came down all the way which left me with a lovely snaggle tooth smile and my front lowers were quite crooked. Functionally I always had an overbite and eventually my periodontist told me orthodontia was something that should be done for my future dental health. I guess I needed to hear that, and cosmetically I was increasingly self conscious about my teeth. In the US, people tend to have straight teeth and I really felt embarrassed by mine as I got older, especially in professional situations. I finally did Invisalign when I was ~ 50 YO, my treatment lasted 2 years with adjustments for a 3rd before my orthodontist was done. He never was completely satisfied with that snaggle tooth but eventually I was ok with the progress. BB, I know how you feel about being strict, I was too, so you can either skip the tasting or skip the time lag till you realize it won't matter if your trays are out for an extra hour or so ;). Invisalign definitely does a great job eliminating snacking since it's such a production to take em out and replace them, it better really be worth it. I found that I've also kept a good habit from my Invisalign days-I always floss and brush my teeth immediately after I eat which of course was necessary with the trays. I wear my aligners to sleep every 3rd night which keeps them in order. Don't know what you are using to remove the trays but I discovered this tool early on and never looked back. Especially when you switch to a new set of trays, getting those *#&$^ tight things out is not easy! These are magic. And here is the cleaner I use, I swear by it, really does a great job of keeping the trays nice and fresh. I don't know if your ortho has mentioned the 'bumps' but I wasn't really aware of or prepared for them. They are little clear raised round circles bonded to the teeth so the retainers can move them at various stages of treatment. And they are not invisible, at least I didn't feel they were. So for awhile when I had bumps on my front teeth, I felt quite self conscious. Otherwise the invisalign was great for not making it obvious I was doing orthodontics. Good luck, as mentioned I'm so happy I did the Invisalign treatment and my only regret is I wish I'd done it many years earlier!