Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could also just write an arbitrary date and the name of the most convenient shop when it fails, so I really don't see what good that does, it's very far from a receipt.
At the very least, it gives you an idea which receipt to look for in your box of receipts/warranties. And no, I am not happy about having to think about storing receipts for mundane things like light bulbs either, but it is the only thing that calms down my nerves when yet another bulb with 5 year warranty fails in a year.
There's something off about LED bulbs
941–950 of 966 posts
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#942Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exciting, but that article is from 2016 and here we are in 2023 with no commercial availability. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskScienceDiscussion/comments/j6hwn... asked what happened with no real updates.
> Exciting, but that article is from 2016 and here we are in 2023 with no commercial availability. That is a fantastic point. If they can't revolutionizing lighting in 7 years, it will never happen. Oh, btw, LED was invented in 1962, but it only took about half a century for the commercial viability of high powered LED lighting to appear and begin to take over the lighting market in 2011.
That said ...
... LEDs involve finding materials which exhibit specific quantum behaviours which correspond to human visual acuity.
Photonic bulbs involve the much simpler blackbody radiation concepts of not only incandescent light bulbs but hundreds to thousands of millennia of previous experience with combustion-based lighting ... and, yes, the added twist of finding viable IR-reflective / visual-spectrum emissive materials.
The second problem seems more reasonably simpler. One would hope that progress might be occuring at a more rapid rate.
(There's a similar argument I've used to contrast nuclear fission, which was commercially exploited within two decades of first demonstration, and nuclear fusion, which coming on a century from its theoretical understanding remains not even experimentally demonstrable on a continuous, energy-positive basis, let alone in commercial application. Some problems are just hard.
Yes, there are thresholds and breakthroughs, and they do occur. But given a few decades of lived experience matching advertisement to delivery, as well as a stronger awareness of historical examples and trends, patterns do become evident.
And that said: I will keep an eye on this. It does have the advantages of being simple, based on very well-proved technology, and a reasonable extension of same.
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#943Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#944There's a lot wrong with LEDs in general and retrofit (E27 bulbs) in particular. In no particular order - LED emitters driven hard for cost reasons, age and fail quickly - Power supplies driven hard for cost reasons, age and fail quickly - Poor CRI and SSRI - Flickering - Dim-to-warm is uncommon - Poorly designed power supplies that age and fail quickly - The same light quality is vastly more expensive to achieve wit…
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#945Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trying to cram all the infrastructure for an LED lamp into the shape of a light bulb is a bad idea, even if the input power is DC. Good designs for LED lighting have larger surface areas for heat dissipation and some physical/thermal separation between the LEDs and the power supply. A quality power supply does not produce flicker. As other comments have noted, dimming, or even predictable output requires some sort of…
Probably going to sound crazy, but we could start running water pipes in front of the walls and under the ceilings and mounting the LED's directly on the pipes for cooling. Creativity, thinking wholistically... the entire contemporary western house design needs a rethink frankly, from DC circuits to electrification to modular, mass-produceable utility drop-in pods, all with an eye towards integrated systems design pa…
Simple metal fins are more than sufficient along with a high efficiency power supply.
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#946Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind: all LEDs leak blue light even the warm ones (color is achieved by average so you can have high red and high blue and it looks balanced visually). These bright blue leaking LEDs are great during the day — especially those with high CRI and R9 values. But not at night when you’re trying to go to bed! Switch to incandescent only in the evenings until they figure out blue-less dimmable LEDs
Not all, only white LEDs. You can use any cheap LED RGB strip without white components and set it to yellow/orange light with blue completely off. It has poor CRI though.
But for going to sleep it's not a bad idea.
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#947Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not all, only white LEDs. You can use any cheap LED RGB strip without white components and set it to yellow/orange light with blue completely off. It has poor CRI though.
Obviously it has bad CRI because that requires a blue component :) But for going to sleep it's not a bad idea.
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#948Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Exciting, but that article is from 2016 and here we are in 2023 with no commercial availability. That is a fantastic point. If they can't revolutionizing lighting in 7 years, it will never happen. Oh, btw, LED was invented in 1962, but it only took about half a century for the commercial viability of high powered LED lighting to appear and begin to take over the lighting market in 2011.
The concept is interesting, and reading the article reversed my initial response to treat this as a crank concept. That said ... ... LEDs involve finding materials which exhibit specific quantum behaviours which correspond to human visual acuity. Photonic bulbs involve the much simpler blackbody radiation concepts of not only incandescent light bulbs but hundreds to thousands of millennia of previous experience with…
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#949Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Exciting, but that article is from 2016 and here we are in 2023 with no commercial availability. That is a fantastic point. If they can't revolutionizing lighting in 7 years, it will never happen. Oh, btw, LED was invented in 1962, but it only took about half a century for the commercial viability of high powered LED lighting to appear and begin to take over the lighting market in 2011.
The concept is interesting, and reading the article reversed my initial response to treat this as a crank concept. That said ... ... LEDs involve finding materials which exhibit specific quantum behaviours which correspond to human visual acuity. Photonic bulbs involve the much simpler blackbody radiation concepts of not only incandescent light bulbs but hundreds to thousands of millennia of previous experience with…
LED has severe problems, some solvable, some not. The article mentions flicker, but really should have specified. Nearly all LED drivers employ PWM. There are constant current LED drivers, and they are more efficient than PWM drivers, but PWM drivers are cheaper to design and manufacture. While many will claim PWM doesn't bother them because they can't detect it, they're not only exhibiting callousness for those that are bothered and harmed by PWM, they're falling into a fallacious trap, i.e. what they don't know and can't detect can't harm them, which is patently false, and one counter example is carbon monoxide. PWM LED drivers are now ubiquitous, and its effects range from annoying to painful, as anyone that has experienced migraine can attest.
Regarding the actual light LED produces, nearly all LED available are weighted towards the blue spectrum, and this light has been shown to massively mess with wildlife and shorten human lifespans by years by disrupting circadian rhythm, which strangely can lead to diabetes and heart disease.
LED proponents are obsessed with brightness, but this is also a trap, because brightness is not as important as what can be seen. Consensus among lighting and eye experts is that more can be seen with a dimmer light that reproduces color perfectly than with a much brighter light that does not.
As these issues with LED are mitigated, the drivers become more expensive and the LEDs become less efficient. And as the article mentions, the phosphors of better color-producing LEDs will fade rather quickly and over time no longer reproduce colors accurately. And let's realize that the best LED can ever achieve, what the technology has always been striving for, is to perfectly match what incan does with little to no development. Maybe someday LED light will perfectly match incan light, but it is not today and it isn't next year.
What it starts to look like, if the trend can be detected, is that as we fully mitigate the problems of LED, the more expensive it becomes until its cost and durability nearly reaches parity with what we already have with incandescent. It's starting to become a wash.
So unlike LED, if incan can be made more efficient, and there is a massive amount of room for improvement in efficiency there, then incandescent undoubtedly will return and dominate the lighting market. I liberally estimated 20 years, but it may take longer, but it really doesn't matter to my major point, which is that incandescent is coming back, and this is a very very good thing, because LED light, as efficient as it is, still absolutely sucks.
Re: There's something off about LED bulbs
#950Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m sorry, but your solution to bad bulbs is to say “you’re holding/using it wrong.” It’s not my fixtures’ problem. It’s these crappy bulbs.
The bulbs not being suited to certain uses doesn't make them bad bulbs, it makes them more limited. There are bulbs that are good for external use and ones that are not; but that doesn't make the external ones "better", it makes them different. There's tradeoffs. And the tradeoffs for LEDs have gotten better over time, but are still there. You don't go buy offroad vehicle, then complain it doesn't drive as comfortabl…