• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 29 votes

Lostfalco's Extensive Nootropic Experiments [Curated]

nootropic

  • Please log in to reply
4019 replies to this topic

#121 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:10 AM

That is an excellent find. I have read it.

There is definitely a biphasic dose response involved with lllt...http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20011653.

Hopefully, the optimal dosing protocol/s will become clearer as more studies (and reasonably safe self experiments?) are done. wink, wink

A bite is filling, a million are fatal; megadosing leads to megadeath; and other such tasteless puns.


Looks like the golden middle way rule applies here.. looking forward to more reports.


Yep. The good ol' inverted U.

I'm looking forward to peoples' experiences as well. I couldn't find any personal experience reports (other than Asprey's brief and somewhat inaccurate video; all the sources I've read list 880nm as 'near' infrared, not 'far') on the web at all...we're pretty much breaking new ground here. btw, if anyone finds the name of the doctor that Dave refers to I would love to hear the results of his studies/self-experiments.

#122 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:19 AM

Hey guys. I'm buying a tDCS kit from here. The price is the lowest and the setup is professional. I decided not to build my own setup as I am not inclined to experiment with electricity. I'll do an unboxing of their product for Longecity since they are a new company. Hope this works, should be here soon enough:

http://www.biocurrentkit.com/

Enjoy

I'll be posting the results from this kit in a log for this device. After maybe a couple of months when I have more dough I'll get a LLLT device. Cheers.


Looks good Yada! Looking forward to your log. Beat me by over $100...bastard. ;)

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#123 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 07 May 2013 - 03:12 AM

Interesting thread!

Ever tried Testosterone for memory purposes?
Increasing my levels of this hormone basically improved my physiology on so many levels. Among others:
Memory, strength, confidence, motivation, social influence, calm, stimulant recovery time and effectiveness. (basically quality of life)

The hormone is also a precursor to endogenous neurosteroids and is tremendously effective at increasing nerve growth factors.
I also suspect it significantly enhances the protein-synthesis aspect of LTP.

In contrast to what most people think: no, it doesn't make you buff or aggressive by itself.
The reason it's associated with stupidity is because the typical user overfeeds himself into apathy.

I'm asking because I've found it to be the single most effective way to permanently enhance one's physiology, even after trying literally everything else. Modafinil gets the 2nd prize though, even if it's just a temporary fix.

Do you have any guess on why you don't need to cycle modafinil? I, like many others, get withdrawal-headaches after only 1 day of use.


Thanks Chung! I appreciate it.

I think you're def right about test. It doesn't deserve the arch-villian status that many people bestow upon it. For a lot of people, reasonable doses have been completely life-changing. I'm glad to hear that it works so well for you.

I have not tried test at this point (my levels were very good per most recent blood test), though I have nothing inherently against it. The last time I looked at the literature I came to the (provisional) conclusion that exogenous test should not be taken until absolutely necessary due to the combination of endogenous shutdown and uncertainty of restart. Once the 'boys' take a nap, there's no guarantee that they'll wake up again (though they might with Clomid, HCG, etc.). Sounded wiser to me to wait until I was ready for the long haul. What are your thoughts on this?

#124 Reformed-Redan

  • Guest
  • 2,200 posts
  • -9
  • Location:Thousand Oaks, CA

Posted 07 May 2013 - 05:30 AM

Can anyone hypothesize why after 2 weeks the HAM-D and A scores started rising again in the study?
Posted Image

Edited by yadayada, 07 May 2013 - 05:32 AM.


#125 peakplasma

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 85
  • Location:Canada sometimes Philadelphia
  • NO

Posted 07 May 2013 - 05:55 AM

Can anyone hypothesize why after 2 weeks the HAM-D and A scores started rising again in the study?

No hypothesis needed. You are interpreting the chart upside down.

The lower the scores the better the depression.

The initial scores are high since the subjects were depressed then after the treatment the depression went into remission seen with lower scores after 2 weeks but the benefits faded after 4 weeks and scores returned to pre-treatment levels.

#126 Reformed-Redan

  • Guest
  • 2,200 posts
  • -9
  • Location:Thousand Oaks, CA

Posted 07 May 2013 - 06:24 AM

Can anyone hypothesize why after 2 weeks the HAM-D and A scores started rising again in the study?

No hypothesis needed. You are interpreting the chart upside down.

The lower the scores the better the depression.

The initial scores are high since the subjects were depressed then after the treatment the depression went into remission seen with lower scores after 2 weeks but the benefits faded after 4 weeks and scores returned to pre-treatment levels.

Umm, yeah; but, why did they go up again? You get my point, right?

#127 peakplasma

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 85
  • Location:Canada sometimes Philadelphia
  • NO

Posted 07 May 2013 - 07:00 AM

Can anyone hypothesize why after 2 weeks the HAM-D and A scores started rising again in the study?

No hypothesis needed. You are interpreting the chart upside down.

The lower the scores the better the depression.

The initial scores are high since the subjects were depressed then after the treatment the depression went into remission seen with lower scores after 2 weeks but the benefits faded after 4 weeks and scores returned to pre-treatment levels.

Umm, yeah; but, why did they go up again? You get my point, right?

Do you mean why weren't the benefits of the treatment permanent? The effects of a single treatment lasted 4 weeks, that seems pretty good, no?

#128 chung_pao

  • Guest
  • 352 posts
  • 92
  • Location:Sweden.

Posted 07 May 2013 - 04:00 PM

Thanks Chung! I appreciate it.

I think you're def right about test. It doesn't deserve the arch-villian status that many people bestow upon it. For a lot of people, reasonable doses have been completely life-changing. I'm glad to hear that it works so well for you.

I have not tried test at this point (my levels were very good per most recent blood test), though I have nothing inherently against it. The last time I looked at the literature I came to the (provisional) conclusion that exogenous test should not be taken until absolutely necessary due to the combination of endogenous shutdown and uncertainty of restart. Once the 'boys' take a nap, there's no guarantee that they'll wake up again (though they might with Clomid, HCG, etc.). Sounded wiser to me to wait until I was ready for the long haul. What are your thoughts on this?


You're completely right. Exogenous test will shut down endogenous production. And cycling is too much of a risk and hassle, IMO.
That's why I go the endogenous route and use low dose Clomid (for increasing endogenous production via LH) along with a reliable aromatase inhibitor to avoid conversion to estrogen. It's a decent method which works well for me, but it requires very precise and individual dosing to avoid sides (too much E2, too low E2...). Interestingly, I started off with just a Clomid and got very high levels of estrogen, which actually benefitted cognitive performance, mood and especially verbal memory. (the female brain, lol)
But, with the addition of anastrozole (AI) I'd say this stack is very effective and safe for most people.

#129 kevinseven11

  • Guest
  • 385 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Texas

Posted 07 May 2013 - 05:34 PM

Is this lazer tech available on amazon? Also does it yield energy, or a lack of being tired?
Ive read studies showing that many flavinoids alter dna through epigenetics. Perhaps thats where to start.

#130 Reformed-Redan

  • Guest
  • 2,200 posts
  • -9
  • Location:Thousand Oaks, CA

Posted 07 May 2013 - 05:44 PM

Can anyone hypothesize why after 2 weeks the HAM-D and A scores started rising again in the study?

No hypothesis needed. You are interpreting the chart upside down.

The lower the scores the better the depression.

The initial scores are high since the subjects were depressed then after the treatment the depression went into remission seen with lower scores after 2 weeks but the benefits faded after 4 weeks and scores returned to pre-treatment levels.

Umm, yeah; but, why did they go up again? You get my point, right?

Do you mean why weren't the benefits of the treatment permanent? The effects of a single treatment lasted 4 weeks, that seems pretty good, no?

Oh, I must have misread something. That's astonishing. Can somone post a followup on this study when it comes out with a larger group of participants.

#131 mait

  • Guest
  • 256 posts
  • 64
  • Location:Northern Europe

Posted 07 May 2013 - 08:36 PM

Please give me the full name of this follow-up study yadayad and I can upload a pdf here.

#132 mettmett

  • Guest
  • 112 posts
  • 6
  • Location:United States
  • NO

Posted 07 May 2013 - 09:15 PM

do you think if you put something like the vetrolaserr on your testes it would increase testosterone production, or would it be harmful?
  • like x 1

#133 abelard lindsay

  • Guest
  • 873 posts
  • 227
  • Location:Mare Serenitatis Circumlunar Corporate Republic

Posted 07 May 2013 - 11:07 PM

You're completely right. Exogenous test will shut down endogenous production. And cycling is too much of a risk and hassle, IMO.
That's why I go the endogenous route and use low dose Clomid (for increasing endogenous production via LH) along with a reliable aromatase inhibitor to avoid conversion to estrogen. It's a decent method which works well for me, but it requires very precise and individual dosing to avoid sides (too much E2, too low E2...). Interestingly, I started off with just a Clomid and got very high levels of estrogen, which actually benefitted cognitive performance, mood and especially verbal memory. (the female brain, lol)
But, with the addition of anastrozole (AI) I'd say this stack is very effective and safe for most people.


The main problem with Clomid is that it lowers libido significantly.

#134 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 08 May 2013 - 03:22 AM

Can anyone hypothesize why after 2 weeks the HAM-D and A scores started rising again in the study?

No hypothesis needed. You are interpreting the chart upside down.

The lower the scores the better the depression.

The initial scores are high since the subjects were depressed then after the treatment the depression went into remission seen with lower scores after 2 weeks but the benefits faded after 4 weeks and scores returned to pre-treatment levels.

Umm, yeah; but, why did they go up again? You get my point, right?

Do you mean why weren't the benefits of the treatment permanent? The effects of a single treatment lasted 4 weeks, that seems pretty good, no?

Oh, I must have misread something. That's astonishing. Can somone post a followup on this study when it comes out with a larger group of participants.


Peak is right...the scores went back up to approx baseline because they only lasered on day one. And you're right Yada, it really is pretty astonishing that 8 minutes did that. I'm really looking forward to more future studies and subsequent refinement.

#135 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 08 May 2013 - 03:31 AM

You're completely right. Exogenous test will shut down endogenous production. And cycling is too much of a risk and hassle, IMO.
That's why I go the endogenous route and use low dose Clomid (for increasing endogenous production via LH) along with a reliable aromatase inhibitor to avoid conversion to estrogen. It's a decent method which works well for me, but it requires very precise and individual dosing to avoid sides (too much E2, too low E2...). Interestingly, I started off with just a Clomid and got very high levels of estrogen, which actually benefitted cognitive performance, mood and especially verbal memory. (the female brain, lol)
But, with the addition of anastrozole (AI) I'd say this stack is very effective and safe for most people.


The main problem with Clomid is that it lowers libido significantly.


I have definitely heard that Abelard. I remember reading about paradoxical effects in which test is raised significantly by clomid and yet patients don't report the usual benefits associated with higher test. I also remember reading that it wasn't exclusively due to the obvious culprit...extra estrogen converted from the extra test. Maybe you could shed some more light on this for me.

#136 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 08 May 2013 - 03:55 AM

do you think if you put something like the vetrolaserr on your testes it would increase testosterone production, or would it be harmful?


There are a couple of pubmed studies in which they tested the effects of irradiating rat testes...it was mostly for fertility reasons though. I have yet to see any human studies on this but laser therapy is 50+ years old, I'll bet somebody's tried it.

There would definitely be a power issue with the Vetro on this. Remember, much of the light is being blocked by the cranium before it reaches the brain. Testes, on the other hand, would pretty much be a straight shot. You could hold it a long distance away (which would be pretty tricky) or do it for a very brief time. Personally, I have not tried it and I would not recommend it...actually, I would strongly discourage it...until somebody finds studies. There's no reason in principle that the proper dose of light therapy wouldn't work here though. We just have no idea what that dose is.

If you find any studies, please let me know. I'd love to read them.

#137 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 08 May 2013 - 04:15 AM

Is this lazer tech available on amazon? Also does it yield energy, or a lack of being tired?
Ive read studies showing that many flavinoids alter dna through epigenetics. Perhaps thats where to start.


http://www.amazon.co...c/dp/B004QECAU4

http://www.vetrolaser.com/

I've noticed increases in energy and endurance.

Right now, the best prospect for epigenetic learning enhancement seems to be HDAC2 inhibition. I'm unaware of anything that targets this specifically. What are your thoughts on this and flavonoid epigenetic modification in general?

Thanks for taking the time to write!

#138 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 08 May 2013 - 04:35 AM

Thanks Chung! I appreciate it.

I think you're def right about test. It doesn't deserve the arch-villian status that many people bestow upon it. For a lot of people, reasonable doses have been completely life-changing. I'm glad to hear that it works so well for you.

I have not tried test at this point (my levels were very good per most recent blood test), though I have nothing inherently against it. The last time I looked at the literature I came to the (provisional) conclusion that exogenous test should not be taken until absolutely necessary due to the combination of endogenous shutdown and uncertainty of restart. Once the 'boys' take a nap, there's no guarantee that they'll wake up again (though they might with Clomid, HCG, etc.). Sounded wiser to me to wait until I was ready for the long haul. What are your thoughts on this?


You're completely right. Exogenous test will shut down endogenous production. And cycling is too much of a risk and hassle, IMO.
That's why I go the endogenous route and use low dose Clomid (for increasing endogenous production via LH) along with a reliable aromatase inhibitor to avoid conversion to estrogen. It's a decent method which works well for me, but it requires very precise and individual dosing to avoid sides (too much E2, too low E2...). Interestingly, I started off with just a Clomid and got very high levels of estrogen, which actually benefitted cognitive performance, mood and especially verbal memory. (the female brain, lol)
But, with the addition of anastrozole (AI) I'd say this stack is very effective and safe for most people.


Very interesting Chung. So Clomid for extra test and Arimidex to prevent excess conversion to estrogen. If you don't mind me asking, how much did your test increase and how long did it take you to get the balance right? I know those drugs are both really tricky. Goldilocks is a harsh mistress.

Also, as Abelard mentioned, Clomid can have some paradoxical effects...test goes up, but "Mr. Happy" doesn't. Obviously, you don't have to share any specific personal details, but what have you found as you've studied and experimented and how were you able to avoid the typical clomisery?

Edited by lostfalco, 08 May 2013 - 04:36 AM.


#139 OpaqueMind

  • Guest
  • 471 posts
  • 144
  • Location:UK
  • NO

Posted 08 May 2013 - 04:08 PM

Just to double-check LF, you found 4 minutes each at EEG sites F3 and F4 daily with days off occasionally an effective schedule? And if not there then on the forehead?

Naturally I'll be doing more investigation on the matter but ma lazers due any day soon and I want to get crackalackin soon as it arrives :)

#140 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:26 AM

Just to double-check LF, you found 4 minutes each at EEG sites F3 and F4 daily with days off occasionally an effective schedule? And if not there then on the forehead?

Naturally I'll be doing more investigation on the matter but ma lazers due any day soon and I want to get crackalackin soon as it arrives :)


Yes sir. That's pretty much the drill.

#141 Reformed-Redan

  • Guest
  • 2,200 posts
  • -9
  • Location:Thousand Oaks, CA

Posted 09 May 2013 - 03:52 AM

Hey, so what laser should one use? I'm looking for something in the 250mw/cm^2 power density range.
You could also use this:
http://www.amazon.co...keywords=880 nm
Don't know about the power density and how effective is 880nm.

#142 Reformed-Redan

  • Guest
  • 2,200 posts
  • -9
  • Location:Thousand Oaks, CA

Posted 09 May 2013 - 04:00 AM

This is definitely worth mentioning.
http://heelspurs.com/led.html

#143 peakplasma

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 85
  • Location:Canada sometimes Philadelphia
  • NO

Posted 09 May 2013 - 08:54 AM

Hey, so what laser should one use? I'm looking for something in the 250mw/cm^2 power density range.
You could also use this:
http://www.amazon.co...keywords=880 nm
Don't know about the power density and how effective is 880nm.

I msged this guy. The LEDs are only 20mw each to 720mw total. It might still work.

http://heelspurs.com/led.html

Yeah, this guy is great. He recommends 830nm as best.

#144 mettmett

  • Guest
  • 112 posts
  • 6
  • Location:United States
  • NO

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:29 PM

do you think if you put something like the vetrolaserr on your testes it would increase testosterone production, or would it be harmful?


There are a couple of pubmed studies in which they tested the effects of irradiating rat testes...it was mostly for fertility reasons though. I have yet to see any human studies on this but laser therapy is 50+ years old, I'll bet somebody's tried it.

There would definitely be a power issue with the Vetro on this. Remember, much of the light is being blocked by the cranium before it reaches the brain. Testes, on the other hand, would pretty much be a straight shot. You could hold it a long distance away (which would be pretty tricky) or do it for a very brief time. Personally, I have not tried it and I would not recommend it...actually, I would strongly discourage it...until somebody finds studies. There's no reason in principle that the proper dose of light therapy wouldn't work here though. We just have no idea what that dose is.

If you find any studies, please let me know. I'd love to read them.


I found this: http://www.rj-laser....infertility.htm

It mentions the rat study and some more. It confirmed our theory. The right amount of laser is stimulatory but the wrong amount is detrimental.

a couple excerts:
"Our results showed that irradiating human sperms with low-level 830-nm diode laser can improve their progressive motility depending on both laser density and post-exposure time."

"Treated samples were exposed to a 30 second infrared laser pulse of 50 mW/cm(2) at 905 nm...A significant increase in motility, most prominent in oligospermic and asthenospermic samples (85% increase), was observed 30 minutes after the treatment (p<0.0001). No significant increase in DNA damage compared to control samples was observed"

Of course none of this mentions testosterone but I would assume it would stimulate the release to some extent.

Edited by mettmett, 09 May 2013 - 01:29 PM.


#145 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:30 PM

Hey, so what laser should one use? I'm looking for something in the 250mw/cm^2 power density range.
You could also use this:
http://www.amazon.co...keywords=880 nm
Don't know about the power density and how effective is 880nm.


Here's a direct quote from the Schiffer 2009 study: "The wavelength of 810nm is optimum for light penetration of living tissue due to minimization of absorption by all three major tissue chromophores, hemoglobin, melanin and water. Moreover, this wavelength has been shown to be effectively absorbed by mitochondria that are believed to be responsible for the biological effects of photobiomodulation."

That's why I went with 808-810nm. Karu mentions 830nm as an excellent wavelength but I haven't seen any studies that use this in human brains. If you find one let me know! I'd love for you guys to figure out a better way to do this than I have. My sources are your sources.

#146 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:35 PM

This is definitely worth mentioning.
http://heelspurs.com/led.html


Agreed.

I read his whole site a few months back. Maybe he can build us one of those led helmets(?) he's wearing.

#147 lostfalco

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,686 posts
  • 414
  • Location:the present

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:42 PM

Hey, so what laser should one use? I'm looking for something in the 250mw/cm^2 power density range.
You could also use this:
http://www.amazon.co...keywords=880 nm
Don't know about the power density and how effective is 880nm.

I msged this guy. The LEDs are only 20mw each to 720mw total. It might still work.

http://heelspurs.com/led.html

Yeah, this guy is great. He recommends 830nm as best.

Awesome, Peak

Did he mention anything more about his transcranial lllt experiences? Price for custom built arrays? (Sry, this may be on his site. I read it a few months ago.)

#148 zawy

  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 May 2013 - 05:35 PM

I'm glad to see they finally got this web site up and working again. I'm the guy with the http://heelspurs.com/led.html page. If the 810 penetrates better, it might be best for deep injuries, but probably not by a large amount. 830 should have about the same penetration. If anyone comes by Montgomery AL I can let you try on my LED helmet if I haven't butchered it for parts. I'd be surprised if there is any more powerful "helmet" in the world, but if you place a gallon zip-lock bag of about 1 quart water on your head then place a $10 500 W halogen flood light from walmart within 1 to 3 inches, then you should get a lot more healthy light energy to your brain than my helmet. When compared in terms of the energy from LEDs and laser, this should provide about 20 watts in the "mitochondria-active" range (1/3 of the 500 W comes out as light like the sun, and about 1/4 of that light is in the healthy range of 4 wavelengths, and about 1/2 of that is wasted in not being on a specific wavelength like the LEDs). The water is to absorb heat. This assumes the head is bald or shaved. It covers about 200 cm^2 so the intensity should be 20/200 = 100 mW/cm^2 which I think is 3 times more intense as my helmet but with maybe 3 times less coverage. Maybe I will do 4 of these 500 W halogen surrounding my head with some water blocking contraption. I guess I could make and sell a copy of my helmet for $800. My costs are $0.15 per 830 nm LED 1,500 LEDs, $20 for 12 circuit boards, $20 high-power supply, $5 solder. Approx $300 in parts, 10 hours pain-in-the-butt work. Actually, I could have them pulse at 5 times the intensity using a 20% duty cycle. There are only specious theoretical reasons why this type of pulsing will help, and it has to be at a very fast 50 uS on, 250 uS off speed, if not 10 uS on and 50 uS off. In practice I am still trying to determine if pulsing is better. So far the result are promising. If I put a fan and box on each board with pulsing, it can be 3 times stronger so that treatment would be 5 minutes instead of 20 to 30 minutes ($1,600... I was and will be selling the boxes individually for $185). Lack of strength is where all LEDs devices on the market are failing.
  • like x 2

#149 peakplasma

  • Guest
  • 341 posts
  • 85
  • Location:Canada sometimes Philadelphia
  • NO

Posted 09 May 2013 - 06:06 PM

I'm glad to see they finally got this web site up and working again. I'm the guy with the http://heelspurs.com/led.html page. If the 810 penetrates better, it might be best for deep injuries, but probably not by a large amount. 830 should have about the same penetration. If anyone comes by Montgomery AL I can let you try on my LED helmet if I haven't butchered it for parts.

Your page is amazing and you are actually the inspiration for me experimenting with this.

I recently ordered a cheap 200mW 830nm laser with a minimum dot diameter of 0.5mm (it's this one).

So if I shine it on my forehead it will provide 200mw at 0.5mm2? 200/0.5 = 400mWcm2 That is probably too much energy density right? Will it burn me? If I manage to refocus the dot to 1cm diameter (as it appears) will it be 200mw per 1cm2?

Thanks!

EDIT: P.S. I intend to use your styrofoam cocoa method!

Edited by peakplasma, 09 May 2013 - 06:22 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#150 zawy

  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 May 2013 - 08:41 PM

The 200 mW will be dispersed mostly in about 4 cm^2 by the time it makes it through the skull, if you're one of those using it for that. So 50 mW/cm^2. If there is a heating issue, you'll feel it in the skin first because not much dispersion has occurred at that point. It will be ideal for cuts. For a 1 inch cut, run it up and down for about a minute, or as soon as you feel good pain relief, whichever comes first. Unless you have dark skin, 150 mW/cm^2 can be used for 5 to 10 minutes at which point the skin is about as hot as heating pad regulations allow....too hot. Dark skin will get hotter a lot faster. To test the energy output of the laser, something like a test tube or syringe with something black somewhere in the water can be used. Keep the thermometer in the water but away from the light. Shine the light on the black object for 5 minutes. Use 3 ml. Watts=4.18*C*3/300 seconds. Where C is in Celsius. For 200 mW the 3 ml should rise about 5 C in 5 minutes. Without insulation, your measurement will be about only 5% too low if the 3 ml cylinder is 3 cm tall. The insulation is needed only for longer tests that are using more water volume. There is another 4% loss in this measurement method from reflection off the surface of the water or through the glass sides. For infrared, there is the risk that a plastic container will be blocking some it in addition to the 4% reflection if you try shining it through the sides to hit the black object.

Edited by zawy, 09 May 2013 - 09:14 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: nootropic

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Topic Led By