Interesting Maybe, But It Doesn’t Matter
August 12, 2009 · Print This Article

Interesting?
O3 + NO2 ………> O2 + NO3
(Ozone + Nitrite ………> Oxygen + Nitrate)
Could be, but in the majority of cases the answer is no.
A potential marine aquarist or even an existing one keeping a reef or fish only system is likely to shy away from anything approaching scientific, and fair enough. (The above is straightforward and understandable if the symbols are understood but gives the general idea). Being a marine aquarist doesn’t mean a white laboratory coat is required or a ‘professor’ appearance, though there are one or two aquarists who love to mystify the marine aquarium and elevate their accomplishments. There isn’t any need to boost success with an aquarium; it is there for all to see.
Some books contain explanatory formulas that would cause consternation with any ordinary person. This isn’t to say that scientific formulas are a waste of space, they aren’t. They are of use to a scientist of course, and interesting to those with experience who wish to delve deep. The same principle applies to many hobbies.
The hobby needs science; it is the scientists who explain. The hobbyist doesn’t need to be involved at that level.
Even when avoiding science troubles still arise. The new aquarist, particularly if interested in a reef system, is still faced with gobble-de-gook. There seems to be an unending stream of needs that must be met or failure will occur. Worse, much of this is in shortened version such as KH (for Kelvin), SG (for Specific Gravity), Alk (for alkalinity), temp (for temperature), calc (for calcium), ppm (for parts per million) etc, never mind the variations with lighting; there isn’t a need to go on. Much of this shortened terminology is often used when hobbyists are ‘chatting’ on forums.
Even when the potential aquarist knows what it all means, the problem doesn’t stop. Seawater quality is the number one requirement so the beginner starts to delve into that. The important parameters are discovered but then there are comments on forums and in books about balance – if this is low that will suffer, generating more confusion.
The beginner can flounder at this stage and start to wonder if it’s worth it, it’s supposed to be an enjoyable hobby, at least that is what was understood at the beginning.
The beginner is going to be a successful marine aquarist with some perseverance and if research is done. The research doesn’t need to be into how everything works and what depends on what. The marine hobby has been going for long enough for scientists and advanced hobbyists to have discovered what leads to success. This doesn’t include deep studies into seawater make-up as an example.
It is now well known what ‘high quality’ seawater means. There are tables available that suggest the levels of various items. For example specific gravity is usually quoted as 1.022 to 1.025 for a fish only system, and 1.024 or 1.025 for a reef system. So the aquarist maintains the seawater at the chosen level having considered the given advantages of numbers within the scale. Other parameters are maintained at the levels suggested for them and doing so generally removes the problem of imbalance. It is also known what is not required in the seawater, for example nitrate. Again there are guidelines that suggest upper limits for different systems, so these levels can again be maintained. The beginner aquarist will also have learned of the need for stability and how to achieve this.
So the marine hobby isn’t a scientific challenge for a beginner or anyone else. All that needs to be known are the suggested levels for a marine system, and then maintain them. It should also be said that the system itself needs to be basically adequate, but again these needs are well known and obtainable.
So the mystique is gone. It must be said that patience and a basic understanding are required. The basic understanding is just that, the numbers that represent the levels that livestock require within an adequate system. When this is achieved and maintained, all things being equal success is on the way.
That doesn’t mean to say however that the aquarist never delves into the world of science. Once the ‘bug’ has bitten, some aquarists have to pursue knowledge about ‘why’, and that is to the advantage of us all.
Related Posts - Is This Hobby Shrinking, Increasing, Confusing or Complex? Nothing like getting value for money - four questions in one. Fair enough. The answers are: No. Yes. Yes. Yes. That was easy, off for...
- We’re All Aquarists There surely is little argument, if any, that a successful marine display aquarium is really eye-catching. That must be one of the major reasons or...
- Aquarium Additives and Soft Corals Keeping a seawater aquarium nowadays is a generally straightforward affair. Provided the design and setting up is satisfactory and the aquarist does the necessary periodic...
- Marine Aquariums - The Beginners Guide For a while now we have had two ebooks (electronic books) available which were designed to assist the beginner with starting either a marine reef...
- Can You Imagine Them Yesterday? - Yesterday They Couldn’t Imagine Us Wild coral reefs don’t think (if they could) in terms of ‘yesterday’ as we understand it. Yesterday could be a thousand years ago or more....
Related Websites - Turning Oil Into Water: The Middle Eastern Resource Accident Waiting To Happen? "Saudi Arabia isn't just running out of oil -- it's running out of water. So is the whole region." So explains Jeff Rubin in his...
- Renting Ski Equipment When you are just getting started in skiing, or when you are trying to figure out whether or not this is the right type of...
- Investing Baby Steps #2: Different Investing Strategies For Beginners Part 1 According to your investor profile, you might want to take a different route for investing. Forget what your neighbour or your brother-in-law told you about...
- Guide to Measuring and Marking Tools pt 3 Levels - Tools that are capable of greatly decreasing the amount of labor involved in a project involve the level, for certain. Many times a...






In the above text I’ve made an error. I could pretend it’s bad typing!
When writing about Kelvin (the scale used with lighting otherwise known as the colour temperature) I’ve stated the shortened abreviation for Kelvin is KH. It isn’t, just K is. Sorry.
John´s last blog ..Remember The Lighting