PDA

View Full Version : High Energy Transmutation



Ghislain
12-04-2014, 10:21 AM
Fact or Fiction?: Lead Can Be Turned into Gold

http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciam/cache/file/B52C0D48-0ADD-4D1D-BBE661DADFFA767C_article.jpg?FF718 (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-lead-can-be-turned-into-gold/ )

Note the reason why Bismuth is the choice over Lead and the extreme power needed. Electricity from the pounding of quartz may not be enough.

See source:Scientific American ( http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-lead-can-be-turned-into-gold/)


Are the scientists missing something?

The written material from days of old are difficult to understand and if one is able to translate and understand their meaning, given that a lot is written in riddles, one then needs the acumen to put into practice the methodology retrieved from these writings.

Some of the obstacles of the everyday alchemist would be room to perform these tasks, money to purchase the equipment needed, dexterity and patience, knowledge, etc...etc...

There are many scientists who have all of these things and, I can only say through what I believe I would do if all the above was available to me, some of these scientists must have studied these text the way they are studied here. I would have expected one of these well equipped scientists to have published a paper on creating the Philosophers Stone by now...I know I would.

One could argue that scientists are lacking in the spiritual element, but in the days of Newton, Paracelsus and those of the same ilk, spirituality was the cornerstone of their endeavours and any scientist worth his weight would look into that aspect too; it is what a good scientist does.

Are we really equipped to find the answers here?

Are we aware of what we are not aware of?

Ghislain

Andro
12-04-2014, 11:29 AM
Note the reason why Bismuth is the choice over Lead and the extreme power needed. Electricity from the pounding of quartz may not be enough.

I've moved the above post (originally on Iron Soul of Gold (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4050-Iron-Soul-of-Gold)) to its own thread , because I think it's quite a different discussion.

The 'quartz-pounding' piezoelectric effect from the other thread (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4050-Iron-Soul-of-Gold) is quite different compared to the vast amounts of energy used to accomplish minute transmutations with Particle Accelerators.

Which brings me to the next point:


Are the scientists missing something?

Yes, they are :)

They're missing the 'Spirit Particle'... (at least those who attempt transmutation with Particle Accelerators)

Accelerating this would be counter-indicated, IF it is even possible...

I'd say it's quite the opposite in this case... Deceleration is required - 'slowing it down', to the point where it's usable in our 'realm'.

And...

No, they aren't (missing anything), because they're exactly where they're supposed to be.

I suppose we could categorize this into 'High Energy - Low Yield' (like Particle Accelerators) and 'Low Energy - High Yield' (like Potassium to Calcium in chickens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corentin_Louis_Kervran#Calcium_anomalies_in_chicke n_eggshells) :))


In response to Kervran's ideas, Nuclear scientists stated if the chickens were to turn potassium into calcium at the rate of several grams a day, the released nuclear fusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion) energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy) of the order of 8 MeV would have turned them into atom bombs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_bomb). Kervran rationalized this discrepancy by believing that the transformation of potassium into calcium (transmutation) happened at low energy. This became Kervran's thesis on which he staked his career. He developed a different model of low-energy transmutation that he called "frittage"


Celebrate every hen!

Also, this 'low energy' is not exactly 'low' (in fact it's quite 'high'), it's only less tangible and in/from a different 'realm', so to speak, and not necessarily measurable by mainstream science.

As for Newton, I can't tell what he would have done if he had access to Particle Accelerators :)
----------------------------------------------------------

Kiorionis
12-05-2014, 12:41 AM
I've started looking at it as a form of Digestive Strength. It makes more sense to me that way than trying to look at transmutation from the perspective of modern physics.

Ghislain
12-05-2014, 11:41 AM
It can be seen from the PDF below on shell formation in chickens that the calcium for shell production comes from the bones of the chicken itself. Calcium intake in the feed is stored in the bone tissue for later shell production.

Kervran's studies does not indicate whether or not the chickens in his experiment suffered osteoporosis, which would have been the case if the chickens were producing eggshell without the replenishment of calcium.

There is not sufficient information given in Kervran's studies to make an informed conclusion.


Shell Formation and Bone Strength in Laying Hens (http://pub.epsilon.slu.se/10894/1/wistedt_a_131121.pdf)



P15

Laying hens have three types of bone tissue namely cortical, spongy (trabecullar bone or cancellous bone) and medullary bone. The cortical bone is the compact structural bone and spongy bone not as compact and located at the end-part of the long bones. The medullary bone develops at sexual maturation (Webster, 2004; Senior, 1974; Taylor & Moore, 1958) and is a kind of woven bone in the marrow cavities and the main storage of calcium for shell formation in the skeleton (Kim et al., 2012). Medullary bone is found in large amounts in modern laying hens throughout the laying period (Fleming et al., 1998) and the bone with the highest content of medullary bone is found in the long leg bones (Whitehead & Fleming, 2000).
Both cortical and spongy bone contribute to the strength of the skeleton. Indirectly the cortical and spongy bone contribute to eggshell formation since these types of bone are resorbed to maintain the medullary bone, which delivers one third of the total calcium needed for the eggshell (Buss & Guyer, 1984; Taylor & Moore, 1958). The amount of medullary bone is constantly remodeled and increasing in volume throughout the egg-laying period at the cost of cortical and spongy bone. The cortical and spongy bone losses start as early as at the onset of reproductive activity in female birds (Wilson & Thorp, 1998).

Could it be that potassium intake interferes with the percentage of bone used in the egg production cycle?

What was Kervran feeding his chickens? Oats contain, on average 7% calcium.


P18

Evidence suggests that the surface epithelium provides the bulk of Ca2+ needed for shell formation

In an article on this subject by a Paul Maher (http://ehealthforum.com/blogs/zebrapdm/chicken-alchemy-part-deux-b15801.html) he says...


As I said in starting this post though, getting to the bottom of this doesn't strike me as overwhelmingly difficult, we are not talking calculus here. Get a grade school class some chickens, like Kervan set up different diets, -calcium -potassium, -calcium +potassium, -potassium +calcium, -calcium, -potassium. If the -calcium +potassium group is laying hard shelled eggs then Houston we have a problem. Send the eggshells off to a lab for analysis and confirmation. Similar experiments could be set-up for plant based biological transmutation claims. Again, this really doesn't seem to be such an intractable problem to resolve, considering the implications perhaps it needs to be further confirmed or put to rest post haste.

I agree with Paul and my concern is that this seems very important and yet there is very little study being done on it; why?


Lets not be too quick to jump on information we know little about because it fits with what we want to believe. The truth is much better. :)


I shall delve deeper.

Ghislain

Ghislain
12-06-2014, 12:57 AM
It makes more sense to me that way than trying to look at transmutation from the perspective of modern physics.

Kiorionis is it just physics or modern science in general?

I have to ask myself why I'm still searching for alchemical answers. I don't even understand most of what science is doing, and less about alchemy with all its puffers and enigma's, but there is still a feeling.

I feel that once something is fixed it cant be unfixed without an immense amount of energy, but the seed of the fixed item still intrigues me. It is that which is unfixed I am interested in...how to attract it and contain it without fixing it...and then what processes may be needed to bias what it will fix into.

Everything came from something and it is whether there is any of this something left unfixed; perhaps the Prima Materia?

Ghislain

Kiorionis
12-06-2014, 04:59 AM
Kiorionis is it just physics or modern science in general?

Both. It takes Hermetic Vision, which is basically seeing how the world works through alchemical processes, not spagyric operations. The foundation of this for me is called Agni, interpreted as the Force of Digestive Fire in Watery Form.


I feel that once something is fixed it cant be unfixed without an immense amount of energy, but the seed of the fixed item still intrigues me. It is that which is unfixed I am interested in...how to attract it and contain it without fixing it...and then what processes may be needed to bias what it will fix into.

You should start looking into the Archeus of Nature, as well as the Athanor. These are metaphorical concepts to describe metaphysical Laws.


Everything came from something and it is whether there is any of this something left unfixed; perhaps the Prima Materia?

Ghislain

But the Something, in relation to physical matter, is Nothing... Lol

Andro
02-07-2015, 10:30 AM
There is not sufficient information given in Kervran's studies to make an informed conclusion.

Related thread: Biologist Louis Kervran (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?2155-Biologist-Louis-Kervran)