In making observations of the formation of root hairs under different conditions, the
This may be a good reason to occasionally turn off the electric field during plant growth to
give plants access to the hardships of life, so they can push forward and extend themselves
to absorb more nutrients. Even though it may be possible for a plant to electrokinetically
come into contact with all of the nutrients it needs to sustain itself, if the plant is not given
a reason to reach out and extend its roots into the soil in search of water and nutrients, it
will have an adverse effect on the growth and strength of the plant.
The idea of continual versus intermittent stimulation brings up a revelation I had regarding
a possible reason for some of the historical failures of electroculture in the late 1930s.
If stimulated plants are operating at a much higher efficiency all of the time, day and
night, then it seems that the system will eventually break down as the plants' energy stores
become depleted without having enough light-energy to sustain the process. Perhaps in the
beginning of the systems' operational period, all will be well, but as the stores slowly run
out due to energy imbalances, it seems feasible that the plants will eventually lose their
vitality. Since it's essential that the plants under stimulation have enough energy to be able
to handle the accelerated effects, it's recommended that higher levels of stimulation occur
during the daytime, when the plant can compensate for the extra energy expenditure.
To support this hypothesis, consider the historical findings of Spechsnew, who found that
the sporadic use of electricity may even be more beneficial compared to continuous use. In
had very successful results when the electric field was applied once every 10 days (Wang,
system running on a timer for a few hours at a time, once per day, or perhaps once every