I’ll have to look up that thread. I may have even read it at one point in time and forgotten. This is not a new debate.RC had a huge thread going for awhile, years ago, but the tests of different medias revealed that siporax was the most effective as far as porosity goes. This gives more surface are for bacteria homing. Pumice is good as well, but again, not quite as porous as siporax(sintered glass). You can probably find y-tube videos with a simple search as well.
You may be right that the siporax has more surface area but that’s not the one and only metric I would consider. If someone developed a new product that was 10x more porous but was less effective because the pores clogged then it would be worse. What I wanted to know is in what way did siporax perform better than MP (or whatever comparable product you tried)? Did it do what you wanted it to do hands down better?
When talking specifically about the MP block (the 8”x8”x4”), claims have been made about being able to achieve an anaerobic environment for the bacteria towards the middle of the block. Siporax has no physical way to achieve this. Has anyone found this to be beneficial?
Please understand that I’m in no means trying to discredit what your saying or your point of view. I’m really respectfully asking for you to elaborate more on how you came to your conclusion.