Lighting

Long and technical for anyone who's interested....

Well, the response made me take another look at the bulbs and I did find more information. The heat of 6,000k at the core of the bulb cools to about 850c-650c on the bulbs surface, the heat does go down considerably as the distance increases from the bulb. the discussion on slashdot, while mostly argumentative, has a lot of good discussion about the bulb and its application. Of course, everything I was reading i read from the perspective of using it specifically for the aquarium.

The spectrum of the bulb seems sufficient for aquarium use mostly, the draw back in comparison with LEDs is that, like MH lights, there is still a number of watts being wasted in the higher frequency that isn't necessary, and while visually appears "sun-like" isn't all that close. The effect however, compared to MH light would be almost identical, as MH overproduces exactly the same way in the higher frequency and can be pretty much ruled to be harmless to organisms.

There is a mentioned scale issue, that due to the science behind the bulb it requires microwaves to produce the plasma, as i've read it explained, the use of microwaves does not work in lower scales, however, this also might be negligible for aquarium use since small scale (say 60 watt bulbs) are not what is needed, we do need the larger output lights and the Luxim bulb frequently shown is comparable to a 400 watt MH light. The bulbs produce a fire hazard for only the stupid as I see, if kept in a proper housing, nothing can come near the 800c bulb surface. So, the heat, presumably would also not affect the temp of the water as I had previously thought but, I have not seen comperable data on the heat dissipation of the plasma bulb compared to the standard MH bulbs.

The microwave and accompanying case to keep the microwaves from escaping is said to be heavy, bulky, and noisy. I do not have further information on this particular fact but I think it can be seen in the video press release Luxim had (in the video, I did not hear the afore mentioned noise). That being said, again, existing MH lights are already somewhat heavy and require noisy fans to cool them, I have not seen any weight comparison in the regard.

I can verify that it is not scientifically possible to "dim" this type of bulb as the physics behind it turn the contents into plasma, so it is either on or off, it either is plasma or it isn't. LEDs can be "dimmed" but they are not truly being dimmed, they are simply turning off and on at a rapid rate.

There is some discussion I have read that the efficiency claims for the bulb are not entirely accurate and account only for the power actually going into the bulb and not the magnatron that is generating the microwaves. I have seen no actual data that confirms or denies this.

The lifespan of the bulb is listed at 20,000 hours, which, is a difference from the LED's mentioned 100,000 hours (practical application 50,000 hours) lifespan.

I'd say my overall verdict on the bulb, is that LEDs still have many advantages for aquarium use that make them preferable to MH. LEDs can be dimmed, which at first glance may be simple, but add for a wide variety of ocean and weather simulation that provides necessary relief to aquarium life health. (I've read several articles on the advantages of periodic "black outs" to the growth/health of corals) LEDs, are directional, which, can actually be advantageous if you wanted to keep a variety of coral types in your tank. And, the wattage used by the LEDs can be much more specifically honed to the needs of aquarium life. I don't know what this means for overall "efficency" for the aquarium, but for practical needs, it may be necessary to consider the lumens per watt as related to "needed" lumens per wavelength per watt.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

 

Not going to quote this because it is very long. 
Who is the source of this article, are they credible?
If a LED can be dimmed by turning the bulb on/off very fast,why can't this bulb?
I have seen you can adjust the brightness of plasma based tv's, if that is the case, why can't the same be done with this plasma based technology.
seems to be it is vary comparible to MH's, only producing less head and requiring less watts/lumen then MH.  So from what I can see it would boil down to a cost issue.  can this blub and the ballests to drive it be made cheaper then the MHs.  If they can I could see a quick replacement of the MH's with these is a near furture.

 

the source is the data spec sheets on Luxium's website, the discussion was on slashdot over what the information says.

The Plasma bulb cannot be dimmed by turning it on and off at a rate faster than the eye can see because it takes the energy within the bulb approx 10 seconds to reach plasma brightness.

Plasma TV's can have brightness adjusted but, as I understand it, it is actually a manipulation of the elctrodes through the individual pixels filled with neon and xenon gass.

I can see it as a more energy efficient replacement to MH's however, they are not being mass marketed yet so there is cost issue, but, they are very similar to existing MH's bulbs in all light quality ways not an advance in lighting ability, flexibility, or longevity.