So long as we're rooting around in the cellar on this topic, with Paul and Jason successful at finding the sweetest fungi among the more common species, I might as well 'fess up to several issues I noted with the Taylor pronouncement that may nuance its telling. One, the tests they performed are narrowly defined but generally described. Using only selected intervals in a set of possible temperatures it's impossible to know from the test data, for example, what impact a temperature of 50, 85 or 105 °F. would have on any of the tests; and the statement, "test higher than its actual value", is indicative of direction but doesn't quantify the amount of impact. E.g., would it test half again as high, 4 times as high, etc.? Second, one would suspect that the lab conducted the tests against standard solutions made by Taylor, though the wording isn't specific in this regard. So, one can't be sure that a given sample of pool water containing higher or lower values (e.g., 600 ppm CH, 50 or 200 ppm TA, 20 or 80 ppm CYA) than the standard solutions used (Hardness Std 200 ppm, Alkalinity Std 100 ppm, CYA Standard 50 ppm) might produce a different outcome. There are other factors as well but this should suffice in giving one pause in ascribing too much authority to any generalization.
Thanks guys!
