Micro Scrubbing Bubbles.

[Cruz_Arias]

Those are hardly analogous as we have reams of directly related evidence to support those ideas. What this is more analogous to is claims that nanobubble water makes people feel better than regular water or that nanobubble infused tires handle better than regular tires.

When you post analogies like those you come close to the argumentation that homeopathy and ionic bracelets use, which is bad argumentation...dare I say specious or fallacious without you again saying that using those words is a personal attack?

Observations are wrong all the time. People think they are seeing effects that aren't happening all the time. That is the point of evidence and testing - to see if effects people think they see are really happening.

But that's the point...

If you had high CO2 in your water which was causing low pH, how would your corals look?
If you had heavy detritus in your DT... how clogged would your system be and what would the overall health of the tank be congested with waste?


How do you think the tanks looked and performed after addressing those two main issues with a simple means of aeration?
How do you think the tank's health is after enabling the detritus and stuck on organics and floating particulates are removed to the sump to be removed by the skimmer as a nutrient export?


Correct... A LOT BETTER... BETTER HEALTH by Micro Scrubbing the System...

 

[Cruz_Arias]

High CO2 ladened reef tanks grow corals slow... right? Affects calcification and skeletal formation.
High CO2 also lowers pH in aquarium systems throughout the world...
Should we bring in a marine biologist to determine if this is correct?


Floatation Separation is proven to work in aquariums, "sewage tanks", and EVERYWHERE ELSE in the world...
No additional material needed to prove that either.

What else is being questioned? The Hobbyists OBSERVATIONS?


"Elegant Corals has been asked countless times what the benefits are to our method.

First off, in the article written by Eric Borne in 2004, "Mything the Point, Myth 14, Microbubbles" small bubbles do not irritate fish gills nor do they KILL corals and inverts...

Here are a few observations and initial benefits we have seen other hobbyists have witnessed first hand WITHOUT ANY CHANGE to what they have been doing before, with just the addition of this regimen to their reef ...program. To many, seeing is believing.

1. CO2 degassing
2. Excess slime removal from corals and fish
3. Better water clarity
4. removal of detritus and floating particulates
5. Remediation of Cyano and Dinoflagellate infestations
6. Better coral and fish membrane health which allows them to grow faster and more colorful...
7. Better appetite in fish (more foraging in algae eaters)
8. Higher pod and invertebrate populations (snails included)
9. Higher activity levels in invertebrates including spawning and breeding
10. Faster carapace hardening in Inverts after shedding... making them less vulnerable to predators
11. Higher survival rate of corals, inverts, and fish (provided water chemistry is good and stable)...

the list goes on and on...

Once again, these are just a few of the physical and physiological observed benefits that hobbyists CAN SEE...

The chemistry and mechanics behind this method is extensive... and very application specific... and we can get lost in the amount of literature and chemical electric reactions that occur in moving (dynamic) water versus static benchtop chemistry...

Solubility of ions in a solution depend on electro negativity of the solute (water in this case)... water is not just water... it is a stream of life giving electricity...

The bubbles rubbing up against each other are like balloons or water droplets in the storm clouds... as they pass each other and rub and bump into each other, static electricity is generated... that's the difference between a stagnant dead lake and a dynamic healthy lake... moving water...

TURBULENCE AND WATER MOVEMENT ALONE DOES NOT GENERATE OXYGEN...

Hopefully this helps answer observed results which is a portion of the scientific method."

 

[Thales]

But that's the point...

If you had high CO2 in your water which was causing low pH, how would your corals look?
If you had heavy detritus in your DT... how clogged would your system be and what would the overall health of the tank be congested with waste?

You have no evidence for any of that. You haven't shown that anyone has high CO2 before bubbling. You haven't said what low pH is and how much this raises it. You haven't shown that corals in those conditions improve after bubbling. You keep showing growth pics that we see without bubbling. You haven't shown that a tank with heavy detritus in a clogged system congested with waste gets better with bubbling, nor have you shown what a heavy detritus, clogged system is.

How do you think the tanks looked and performed after addressing those two main issues with a simple means of aeration?
How do you think the tank's health is after enabling the detritus and stuck on organics and floating particulates are removed to the sump to be removed by the skimmer as a nutrient export?

Correct... A LOT BETTER... BETTER HEALTH by Micro Scrubbing the System...

Better is generally meaningless and is often the support for conformation bias. The ecoaqulaizer, marc weiss products, and a host of other methods and products have relied on people trying them and saying their tank looks better, and as time goes on, people stop using those things and report no difference at all.

I actually kind of like the idea of storming the tank and adding bubbles to help lift detritus away, that could be helpful as a maintenance task, though I think the amount of bubbles needed is far less than you are advocating.

 

[Lasse]

I'm not arguing about this topic anymore, it's really silly, but whatever, the fact is my water is crystal, my corals are open, if they were not happy they wouldn't look so good. My DT isn't a sewer, mixed with heavy solids. Our great sewer system here has been dumping waste into the bay, estuaries, for 30 years, and since Sandy, with NO sewage treatment plant, all waste went right into the bay. The result has been devastating. Algae blooms that choke and kill everything. Arent air bubbles added at sewage treatment plants to lighten the water so it doesn't clog the pipes. I have friends that work there, it's a joke. No one there cares to fix something that's been broken for years.
Remember, every tank runs a little different. I'm a master baker by trade, I could give 10 people the same recipe and get 10 different products. Try it with your friends, the results are funny!

I was not argue against your experiences – I only put in my experiences of really measure different things of aeration in contrast to Thales statement. I´m convinced of that small bubbles are able to oxygenate water during certain circumstances.

However – my first sentence was wrong written. It should bee “For a normal aquarium - yes - the gas exchange happens when the popping bubbles reach the surface and create a large interface between the water and air or/and through heavy water circulation in the surface” .

And please Cruz_Arias Do not Scream to me!!!!

Sincerely Lasse

(for Cruz_Arias SINCERELY Lasse ) :)

 

[Cruz_Arias]

They said it was being presented as a magic silver bullet, and it was, and in some places still is. They also said a whole lot more about the discussion. The discussion is the main point of that podcast, not the actual method.



You have not shown that, you haven't even shown that home reef systems are not stable to begin with.

The "people seeing" the results is validity enough that all systems are not set up like a public aquarium that many of us are used to.

At SeaWorld, we had access to fresh natural ocean water... In the home reef aquarium... not a certainty.
At the Steinhard, you have access to natural seawater as well...

At SeaWorld, we had open air areas and good ventilation gas exchange
At the Steinhard, you too have open air areas and good ventilation
Hobbyists don't have all that luxury... enclosed in a house.

At SeaWorld, we had state of the art filtration devices... With their OWN FILTRATION CENTER Pretty much a large warehouse of filtration and piping.
At the Steinhard, you do too...
At home... Skimmer (typically undersized to fit under a sump stand area), filter floss, smaller reactors (that fit under the sump)

 

[Cruz_Arias]

I was not argue against your experiences – I only put in my experiences of really measure different things of aeration in contrast to Thales statement. Small bubbles are able to oxygenate water during certain circumstances.

However – my first sentence was wrong written. It should bee “For a normal aquarium - yes - the gas exchange happens when the popping bubbles reach the surface and create a large interface between the water and air or/and through heavy water circulation in the surface” .

And please Cruz_Arias Do not Scream to me!!!!

Sincerely Lasse

(for Cruz_Arias SINCERELY Lasse ) :)

I'm not... The Caps are Emphasis... LOL Sorry if you interpreted it like that... LOL :)
:)

 

[Cruz_Arias]

You have no evidence for any of that. You haven't shown that anyone has high CO2 before bubbling. You haven't said what low pH is and how much this raises it. You haven't shown that corals in those conditions improve after bubbling. You keep showing growth pics that we see without bubbling. You haven't shown that a tank with heavy detritus in a clogged system congested with waste gets better with bubbling, nor have you shown what a heavy detritus, clogged system is.



Better is generally meaningless and is often the support for conformation bias. The ecoaqulaizer, marc weiss products, and a host of other methods and products have relied on people trying them and saying their tank looks better, and as time goes on, people stop using those things and report no difference at all.

I actually kind of like the idea of storming the tank and adding bubbles to help lift detritus away, that could be helpful as a maintenance task, though I think the amount of bubbles needed is far less than you are advocating.

How much bubbling am I advocating?
I never quantified how much. I always describe it as a light mist look... and no Jacuzzi... Because that's just silly...
Light haze... small bubbles that don't pop...

ANYONE TURNING THEIR DT INTO A JACUZZI... I wish you the best... but that is not the delivery method that EC or myself have been a proponent of...
Too many big bubbles that affect overall SG of the water (BAD)
Bubbles jetted out under high pressure (BAD)

 

[Cruz_Arias]

You have no evidence for any of that. You haven't shown that anyone has high CO2 before bubbling. You haven't said what low pH is and how much this raises it. You haven't shown that corals in those conditions improve after bubbling. You keep showing growth pics that we see without bubbling. You haven't shown that a tank with heavy detritus in a clogged system congested with waste gets better with bubbling, nor have you shown what a heavy detritus, clogged system is.



Better is generally meaningless and is often the support for conformation bias. The ecoaqulaizer, marc weiss products, and a host of other methods and products have relied on people trying them and saying their tank looks better, and as time goes on, people stop using those things and report no difference at all.

I actually kind of like the idea of storming the tank and adding bubbles to help lift detritus away, that could be helpful as a maintenance task, though I think the amount of bubbles needed is far less than you are advocating.

Rich... you seen them on facebook... you've seen them on thread like these of hobbyists screaming for help...
But all I have seen from trolls and other inconsiderate people are insults and badgering.

The Elegant Corals, LLC Team, yes, there is more than just me, that offered a helping hand like the way we all used to do 20 years back.

Help or don't help. We are doing OUR part.

 

[Thales]

High CO2 ladened reef tanks grow corals slow... right? Affects calcification and skeletal formation.
High CO2 also lowers pH in aquarium systems throughout the world...
Should we bring in a marine biologist to determine if this is correct?

You have to show that this is a problem in a particular aquarium and define how high the CO2 needs to be and how low the pH needs to be.

First off, in the article written by Eric Borne in 2004, "Mything the Point, Myth 14, Microbubbles" small bubbles do not irritate fish gills nor do they KILL corals and inverts...

Eric Borneman, not Borne. And no one is arguing this point.

Here are a few observations and initial benefits we have seen other hobbyists have witnessed first hand WITHOUT ANY CHANGE to what they have been doing before, with just the addition of this regimen to their reef ...program. To many, seeing is believing.

Seeing is believing is a terrible way to make decisions! People see psychic surgery - but there is no reason to believe it!

1. CO2 degassing

How was this observed? How much CO2 was degassed? What is the difference before and after?

2. Excess slime removal from corals and fish

How do you see slime being removed from fish? What is excess slime? How do you know it is excess? How do you know that it is good to be removed?

3. Better water clarity

Could be, could also be conformation bias. Measure it!

4. removal of detritus and floating particulates

Could be, could also be conformation bias. Measure it!

5. Remediation of Cyano and Dinoflagellate infestations

Could be, but also highly suspect because people try many many things before bubbling and these problems often resolve on their own.

6. Better coral and fish membrane health which allows them to grow faster and more colorful...

What is better coral and fish membrane health? How are you determining this? How are you measuring this? Faster and more colorful? By what metric?

7. Better appetite in fish (more foraging in algae eaters)

This has got to be conformation bias. Herbivores forage all the time, that is what they do.

8. Higher pod and invertebrate populations (snails included)

How is this being determined? This would be easy to measure.

9. Higher activity levels in invertebrates including spawning and breeding

How is this being determined? How much higher? What was the level before?

10. Faster carapace hardening in Inverts after shedding... making them less vulnerable to predators

How much faster? What is the speed without bubbling?

11. Higher survival rate of corals, inverts, and fish (provided water chemistry is good and stable)...

How much higher? How is this being determined?

Once again, these are just a few of the physical and physiological observed benefits that hobbyists CAN SEE...

People have seen carapace hardening faster? No way.

The chemistry and mechanics behind this method is extensive... and very application specific... and we can get lost in the amount of literature and chemical electric reactions that occur in moving (dynamic) water versus static benchtop chemistry...

Solubility of ions in a solution depend on electro negativity of the solute (water in this case)... water is not just water... it is a stream of life giving electricity...

The bubbles rubbing up against each other are like balloons or water droplets in the storm clouds... as they pass each other and rub and bump into each other, static electricity is generated... that's the difference between a stagnant dead lake and a dynamic healthy lake... moving water...

TURBULENCE AND WATER MOVEMENT ALONE DOES NOT GENERATE OXYGEN...

Hopefully this helps answer observed results which is a portion of the scientific method."

I am not even going to touch that, as that is the stuff that sounds like snake oil. All the other stuff that I parsed out would be easy to quantify and I look forward to that.

Thanks!

 

[Cruz_Arias]

You have to show that this is a problem in a particular aquarium and define how high the CO2 needs to be and how low the pH needs to be.



Eric Borneman, not Borne. And no one is arguing this point.



Seeing is believing is a terrible way to make decisions! People see psychic surgery - but there is no reason to believe it!



How was this observed? How much CO2 was degassed? What is the difference before and after?



How do you see slime being removed from fish? What is excess slime? How do you know it is excess? How do you know that it is good to be removed?



Could be, could also be conformation bias. Measure it!



Could be, could also be conformation bias. Measure it!



Could be, but also highly suspect because people try many many things before bubbling and these problems often resolve on their own.



What is better coral and fish membrane health? How are you determining this? How are you measuring this? Faster and more colorful? By what metric?



This has got to be conformation bias. Herbivores forage all the time, that is what they do.



How is this being determined? This would be easy to measure.



How is this being determined? How much higher? What was the level before?



How much faster? What is the speed without bubbling?



How much higher? How is this being determined?



People have seen carapace hardening faster? No way.



I am not even going to touch that, as that is the stuff that sounds like snake oil. All the other stuff that I parsed out would be easy to quantify and I look forward to that.

Thanks!

I'm glad you brought up all these points...
For verification of a limewood airstone...

Now only if we can get this level of detail to scrutinize every other technology in this hobby maybe we'll get somewhere!!!

I would like for someone to really delve into why the skimmer works if it's the same premise as this... and it is to a fault. not being able to allow the bubbles into the DT periodically...

This method is an EXTENSION of the skimmer... and works hand in hand with a good one.

 

[anit77]

I have read this whole thread and some of the papers linked. There has been a lot of back & forth with a lot of strong minds (and wills) but not a lot of proof from the couple of major proponents of the processes major claims with regard to nano bubbles. Let me start out by saying I'm just getting started in the hobby and my system is not up and running yet. So I'm not here to confirm or deny that there are positive results from "Bubbling" at night. Nor am I here to state "Nano-bubbles" can or can't be created with the use of hobby grade air and water pumps. I would think that there is a chance that a very small percentage, probably <5% more likely <1%, that could, if even created, theoretically accumulate over consecutive nights bubbling.

While I have not got any experience with reefing I do with fishing, angling. The type of fishing I mostly do requires the keeping of bait fish, mostly Blueback Herring, and I have used most of the products available to help keep the bait healthy. Granted this is not long term, generally through a day maybe two at most. The Keepalive bubbler does a very good job of creating a fine mist of bubbles but in the hotter months it transfers a lot of ambient heat to the water column of the bait tank which I'm trying to keep at 65 to 68 degrees. I am currently using their O2 system to reduce this heat and to reduce the use of a recirculating pump that is on all the time.
I bring this up because after turning either of these systems off there is a coating of bubbles on the sides of the tank, even on the sump side that has no direct exposure to the bubbles. This is due to the gas precipitating out of the water. Just like when pouring a glass of water from the tap. The aerator and screens in the faucet adds air to the water. If the water is left to sit and as it warms the gas will precipitate out of the water on the sides of the glass and anything else in the glass.

I understand that micro bubbles will attach to suspended particles in the water column and to most anything they come in contact with due to surface tension. I have not seen anyone report any bubbles that may have formed from precipitating out on the glass or any other objects in the tank. If there is any precipitation in the tank it will help lift heavier detritus off rocks and the sand bed.
I also have not heard anyone state whether the initial slimming over of corals is good or bad. My 1st thought is that this is a defense mechanism to a irritant from an external stimuli. That it ceases after a day or two would mean that it has become conditioned to the stimuli or that it's not sensed as a threat any longer. With PE I would think that after several consecutive nights of running that the nutrient load has dropped in the tank and the polyps are extending further in an attempt to capture more particles.

I wouldn't view this as turning the whole tank into a skimmer. More of a "Micro-bubble" pre-skimmer which will aide in the removal of detritus and unwanted organisms to the actual skimmer where they can be efficiently removed from the system. With the added benefit of increased oxygenation of the water, a more stable ph during the non-photosynthetic periods and the potential to help with nuance algae. (It would be nice to see some long term results, six months plus. Especially with nitrates without carbon dosing.) None of this sounds bad to me and all of it without the use of the word "Nano".

If there are in fact a minuscule amount of nano bubbles created by going through the return pump and there's a benefit from them with no detriment then great, another bonus. But feel that to continue to add the term "nano" to this process, especially if there's a potential product to be released, there should be independent lab grade scientific testing done to quantify these claims. Not just wild speculations and opinions.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

If there are in fact a minuscule amount of nano bubbles created by going through the return pump and there's a benefit from them with no detriment then great, another bonus. But feel that to continue to add the term "nano" to this process, especially if there's a potential product to be released, there should be independent lab grade scientific testing done to quantify these claims. Not just wild speculations and opinions.

What do you call observations by 3rd party hobbyists?
Claims, observations, and opinions... That's a survey, anit77.

We also call this MICRO-NANObubbling.
Both, though with this rudimentary method, yes... we're getting inconsistent sizes based on different air pumps (pressure) return pumps, and return pump impeller shearing etc... Too many variables to call it TRUE NanoBubbles...

Thank you very much also for your objective (not subjective) view of the matter... Thank you.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

I have read this whole thread and some of the papers linked. There has been a lot of back & forth with a lot of strong minds (and wills) but not a lot of proof from the couple of major proponents of the processes major claims with regard to nano bubbles. Let me start out by saying I'm just getting started in the hobby and my system is not up and running yet. So I'm not here to confirm or deny that there are positive results from "Bubbling" at night. Nor am I here to state "Nano-bubbles" can or can't be created with the use of hobby grade air and water pumps. I would think that there is a chance that a very small percentage, probably <5% more likely <1%, that could, if even created, theoretically accumulate over consecutive nights bubbling.

While I have not got any experience with reefing I do with fishing, angling. The type of fishing I mostly do requires the keeping of bait fish, mostly Blueback Herring, and I have used most of the products available to help keep the bait healthy. Granted this is not long term, generally through a day maybe two at most. The Keepalive bubbler does a very good job of creating a fine mist of bubbles but in the hotter months it transfers a lot of ambient heat to the water column of the bait tank which I'm trying to keep at 65 to 68 degrees. I am currently using their O2 system to reduce this heat and to reduce the use of a recirculating pump that is on all the time.
I bring this up because after turning either of these systems off there is a coating of bubbles on the sides of the tank, even on the sump side that has no direct exposure to the bubbles. This is due to the gas precipitating out of the water. Just like when pouring a glass of water from the tap. The aerator and screens in the faucet adds air to the water. If the water is left to sit and as it warms the gas will precipitate out of the water on the sides of the glass and anything else in the glass.

I understand that micro bubbles will attach to suspended particles in the water column and to most anything they come in contact with due to surface tension. I have not seen anyone report any bubbles that may have formed from precipitating out on the glass or any other objects in the tank. If there is any precipitation in the tank it will help lift heavier detritus off rocks and the sand bed.
I also have not heard anyone state whether the initial slimming over of corals is good or bad. My 1st thought is that this is a defense mechanism to a irritant from an external stimuli. That it ceases after a day or two would mean that it has become conditioned to the stimuli or that it's not sensed as a threat any longer. With PE I would think that after several consecutive nights of running that the nutrient load has dropped in the tank and the polyps are extending further in an attempt to capture more particles.

I wouldn't view this as turning the whole tank into a skimmer. More of a "Micro-bubble" pre-skimmer which will aide in the removal of detritus and unwanted organisms to the actual skimmer where they can be efficiently removed from the system. With the added benefit of increased oxygenation of the water, a more stable ph during the non-photosynthetic periods and the potential to help with nuance algae. (It would be nice to see some long term results, six months plus. Especially with nitrates without carbon dosing.) None of this sounds bad to me and all of it without the use of the word "Nano".

Trying to achieve more consistent bubble size... other companies are racing too... either the hobby falls behind... or we keep up... I suggest we keep up.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

Trying to achieve more consistent bubble size... other companies are racing too... either the hobby falls behind... or we keep up... I suggest we keep up.

And yes... I have spoken with them to utilize their graph with their name on it and their representation.

Elegant Corals, LLC has no association with Fine Bubble Technologies Ltd.

Sincerely, Cruz Arias

 

[Greenstreet.1]

@Thales has some great points in his last post

 

[Cruz_Arias]

@Thales has some great points in his last post

Agreed...

The problem with the hobby is that things are not scrutinized as hard as the limewood airstone depending on "who is associated" with the method... (Favoritism)
I believe regardless of who introduced anything to the hobby it should always be scrutinized like this...

• How many food products are scrutinized this heavily? Does the general public know that thiamin is, how it's produced and how it's derived?
• How many hobbyists scrutinize what blend of potassium is used in the potassium supplements? Potassium Iodide? Potassium Gluconate? Potassium Bromide? Potassium Chloride?
• How many hobbyists understand the difference between the necessities of both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria and what their scientific names of the strains are in all bacteria products?
• How many hobbyists care what constitutes "Magnesium"... Magnesium Sulfate or Magnesium Chloride?
  

For the Record... LOL I did not invent the limewood airstone, nor do I take credit for it's phloem design nor airpumps associated with the method. LOL :)

WE DO TAKE CREDIT FOR PROPER PLACEMENT AND DEFINITION OF THE SIZE BUBBLES AND THE VISUAL DENSITY OF WHAT GOOD LOOKS LIKE.


Over 35,000 views, 20 plus worldwide threads (local and international), and a lot supposition and guessing what would happen negatively... so far, no negatives... a few neutrals... but mostly positives...

And the knowledge is FREE...

 

[Greenstreet.1]

Forget about the lime wood I'm talking about his questions and points in his post

 

[Cruz_Arias]

Forget about the lime wood I'm talking about his questions and points in his post

I would like to see someone compare ANY TWO SYSTEMS in the Hobby...
:)

That would be swell... :)

 

[anit77]

What do you call observations by 3rd party hobbyists?
Claims, observations, and opinions... That's a survey, anit77.

We also call this MICRO-NANObubbling.
Both, though with this rudimentary method, yes... we're getting inconsistent sizes based on different air pumps (pressure) return pumps, and return pump impeller shearing etc... Too many variables to call it TRUE NanoBubbles...

Thank you very much also for your objective (not subjective) view of the matter... Thank you.

Trying to achieve more consistent bubble size... other companies are racing too... either the hobby falls behind... or we keep up... I suggest we keep up.

Cruz, I can see you're passionate about this but I'm failing to see how you are properly responding to questions raised and in some cases completely ignoring them. You keep dancing around the issues without addressing them. Just like the Fine Bubble Technologies graph. There is no mention the the equipment used to create those bubbles and how it relates to what your advocating. Most of the evidence you've posted are from commercial companies using equipment beyond the scope of the discussion here. You've also used a wide variety of terms regarding the bubbles in your posts. Micro, nano and Micro-Nano. It is my understanding you can't create nano bubbles without creating a majority of larger bubbles as well, including micro. So why not just remove "Nano" from all of your future posts until a point where you can properly address the questions raised here? Mainly the following.

We don't have access to high dollar equipment that can create nano bubbles. How are we creating nano bubbles with a wood air diffuser and a return pump? Let's see some lab grade testing to quantify your claims. Once that is done respond to Thales questions in post 730.

We all want to see positive results but you can't keep responding with anecdotal evidence and references that are out of the scope reef aquariums and the equipment we don't have access to.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

Cruz, I can see you're passionate about this but I'm failing to see how you are properly responding to questions raised and in some cases completely ignoring them. You keep dancing around the issues without addressing them. Just like the Fine Bubble Technologies graph. There is no mention the the equipment used to create those bubbles and how it relates to what your advocating. Most of the evidence you've posted are from commercial companies using equipment beyond the scope of the discussion here. You've also used a wide variety of terms regarding the bubbles in your posts. Micro, nano and Micro-Nano. It is my understanding you can't create nano bubbles without creating a majority of larger bubbles as well, including micro. So why not just remove "Nano" from all of your future posts until a point where you can properly address the questions raised here? Mainly the following.

We don't have access to high dollar equipment that can create nano bubbles. How are we creating nano bubbles with a wood air diffuser and a return pump? Let's see some lab grade testing to quantify your claims. Once that is done respond to Thales questions in post 730.

We all want to see positive results but you can't keep responding with anecdotal evidence and references that are out of the scope reef aquariums and the equipment we don't have access to.

I don't see any other product thought or method being scrutinized this hard... Does anyone else think it's funny that they would like a full blown report for correct placement of an aeration device and the correct placement of the air pump...

Because That's all it is... Mother Nature takes care of the rest when it comes to aeration, bioload, and water clarity...