I never suggested the runoff ppms are an accurate source of the feed in the soil, I suggested considering the direction the runoff is trending to influence the amount of feed and identify possible lockout situations that might require flushing.
Sorry, I meant to ask what you meant by half strength not the dial down bit. I think you are both really trying to say half dose not half strength since you are saying the ppms aren't an accurate way of measuring the strength. So if I am understanding correctly you don't want the op to cut their ppms in half you want them to cut the recommended dosage per liter in half?
I still think the ppms are a good baseline that can be used monitor general nutrient levels even if they don't give the whole picture with organics but I admit to not having much soil experience to stand on here. It just seems to me that having a very high nutrient concentration runoff from any medium will eventually cause issues even if the nutrients are organic.
Agreed, it's another piece of information that can be utilized, even though it's not an "accurate" indicator per say, it can help in indicating which direction your heading for sure.
I think what aqua was saying it's of limited value, and I agree with that very much also. Look to other indicators, and that's always a good advice to give anyhow, because it all needs to be taken in context for the bigger picture.
So many things can look the same sometimes is just so difficult to narrow it down to one issue, I think. Even if you see someone, and they got something that looked like what you had, the situation is always slightly different, or even more so.
I think that's why it really needs to be up to the person on point to have a good understanding of the various factors at play, and understand some of the deeper concepts, but I agree that can have it's own set of problem, (confusing) and can make things seem overwhelming or much too complex, when it's often not. It can be, but not generally not so. But I do think it's good to have balanced understanding, and continually grow, just like the plant we love.
People can (and do) spend there entire lives learning new things about this plant. I think the more you get into all the different ways to do things, you really begin to understand the complexity of it all, Growing cannabis isn't like many other kinds of plants, it's almost a culture in and of itself. It's just so friggin huge, and a lifetimes worth of learning the different things, not just learning, but doing them.
Innovations in hydroponics has largely evolved itself as a science based upon this one single plant. Pot growers everywhere have taken hydro to new epic levels with things like C02 and whatnot that no other farmers even would consider, or even dream about.
The science is simply huge in cannabis.
That's not even counting genetics, breeding, chemistry, biochemistry,pharmaceutical analysis as subjects (probably a few left out). It's just mind boggling.
