I've been experimenting on smoking devices, between "Bongs, pipes, and joints" and I finally came to a conclusion on a few things, you should all know about the other ones, so I just did this with the joint only. *I can predict now that my formula is universal and can be used on all smoking devices.* Joints - People have debated for long periods of time if you can make a joint burn slower by doing certain things to it, or double wrapping, or rolling fat joints to slow it down. Well, none of those work, and I've found something that does. Through timed sequences, I have discovered that fat joints burn relatively close to normal joints. So there's really no difference, and there's no argument with double wrapped joints because it's too much paper period. Well anyway, I decided to roll the skinniest joint I could and record the results as well. What I did was, break a pen down, and take out the piece that contains the ink, I rolled the joint paper around that [yes its an extremely small joint]. Then I flattened a little bit of one end so the marijuana wouldn't fall out. I continued to grind the marijuana and stick small pieces at a time in the joint from the top. It takes a little bit of time, but it's not that bad, as long as you don't try to jam a lot in there at one time and you let small pieces drop in and pack that down with the ink part [better to use one that doesn't have any more ink in it]. After it fills up, and you've packed it down good, light it up. The Results? The joint burns just as long as the normal joint and fat joint, but also I've designed this little formula that corresponds to the science side of it. -length (or volume) joint burned divided by weed burnt per second- (Not posting all the info, so I'm just posting a random trial, they were really timed, and remember, the fat and normal joints burned relatively the same time as the micro one, just remember you have to hit the joint *constantly* it's harsh doing it on the fat joints, unless your a pro, and also if you really want to make sure (like I did) you can record the number of hits you took, and take the same hits on the other ones *constantly* again and compare that number of hits to how far you got on the normal and bigger joints. A tip for that is to hit them as hard as you can when you take hits, don't record the little puffs you take, those don't count because you can't really tell for sure how hard your hitting so it's hard to hit that exact same way on the other joints unless you hit it just really big each time and maybe even try timing how long you hit it if you want to be for sure again (like I was). [Micro Joint Trial 4] Distance in inches/Time in minutes = velocity [Volume/Time = Volume burned per second] 3 inches/ 3.38.29 = 0.895 = 2.3 centimeters burned per second [CBPS] [For bongs and pipes, and to be more accurate for joints and blunts, you could use volume burned per second as well. I just didn't have the equipment to measure the volume so I used a joint and did the same thing except used inches since its just about the same concept although not as accurate. This only proves that the higher the centimeters burned per second, the higher you get because you would have to be taking big hits or using a big bowl, or big whatever, and it would rush you faster, which is why everyone knows the bong gets you higher but the duration of the high is lower. [This is why my formula is universal for bowls and pipes it would be volume/time in centimeters, and it could be for joints too.] Note about the graph: About the measuring how high you are part, if you have built up a tolerance, you can increase the 0-100 to 0-200 or even higher, only YOU know how high you get, so feel free to change that up how ever you'd like. What I'm trying to prove is, that just as the higher the VBPS [volume burned per second] the bigger the rush you get, the lower the VBPS the smaller hits you get, but the duration is longer, and you just have more a body high maybe. Remember, this was just answering the most EFFICIENT way of smoking a joint while just using size. The size of the joint, blunt, and bowl is what really matters. *I also think, that this might be able to be applied to other things as well, but you would just have to do a bit more calculating* Haha, I'm pretty high, and I'm not sure at all if anyone else has already done anything like this, just figured I'd post it anyway. *If this is the first time this has been figured out, and my math is wrong [please correct me and still give me the credit] lol, or if the math is right then that's cool also* So if this already hasn't be calculated or shown to people, I'm calling this system Oxys Smoking Law #1 - S.E.C. [or for short, just S.E.C. or SEC which means Smoking Efficiency Check] P.S. Sorry it's so long, tell me if this is a good method or not, it was just a random thought so I had to test it. Edit - I forgot to mention, my main point is smaller joints get you higher than other sized joints, because since it's so tight and so small, since the rate which the joint burns is the same for all sized joints [fat, etc] then the micro joint uses the most weed efficiently since the rate which the paper burn is normal, the smaller the joints you roll the more weed you save, and if you can take big hits, thus making the CPS increase, then you can get even higher! [Will add a little bit more info later]
wait.. what?? dude this sounds like something i would come up with when ive taken way too much of my ADD medication. what are you on, man? lol, but seriously it looks like you put a lot of work into that shit, good job.
You have been now been appointed as GC's resident chief of toking tools. I need a thesis statement on cost effectiveness of bongs vs. blunts/joints by thursday.
And "they" say stoners are stupid.... Show this to any non-smoker and I bet they would change their mind.
amazing research....now apply this thinking to all aspects of smoking ther herb as well as edibles..vapes whatever compile all your information and write a book publish make money and blaze some more..seriously im three months into my first book and its fun as hell gives you a really fun hobby.
You know, that's exactly what I was thinking. I wasn't sure if I could make money off it, but lol if this gets big or anything.. then....I just want it in my name and stuff, lol.
no, smaller joints do not get you higher. if you smoked a fat joint just as quickly, which you specifically stated was possible, it would be the same "CPS" but it would be more volume smoked. no part of that "formula" (which is just d/t=v) proves how long you are high at lower "CPS" or that smoking faster makes you higher for less time. And you used an awful lot of words to say "the faster you smoke the higher you get". lmao, "extraordinary"
I believe you misread the point. It is about the centimeters burned per second, and that the faster it burns = bigger hits/possibly bigger high. Has nothing to do with how fast you smoke it, but everything to do with the burning.
The thing is, it is near the same CPS, of course a joint isn't going to burn the EXACT same amount of time each trial. Anyway, with fatter joints when your "not hitting" the joint, the flame is bigger, and more marijuana is being wasted than with smaller joints. You may get higher, but as some people say, your not getting your "bang for your buck". Meaning that, you might be smoking a lot of marijuana, but the high won't be as great as it COULD be if there wasn't so much marijuana being wasted when your "not hitting" the joint. The formula doesn't prove how long you are high for, but I thought you could figure out on your own, that if you could smoke a bunch of small joints in a small period of time, it'd be like smoking a blunt because with the "small joints" when your not hitting the joint it's not burning as much as it would be if it was bigger. Which means you got more out of the weed than you would if you rolled a fat joint.
so basically you found out bogarting wastes weed you defined CPS as "weed burnt per second" which is not accurate. diameter obviously plays a role in this. and "your" formula to find "cps" is simply the definition of velocity, who do you give "credit" for that? besides, this wastes 10x as many papers and takes way longer than just rolling a joint
MJ_Expert: U did all that research to find out how long joints burn. Man thats incredible LOL. At least u stay true to yer name.