PDA

View Full Version : Phosphorus IS the stone



ArcherSage
10-08-2017, 12:27 AM
I am sure you all know the story of how Phosphorus was discovered, almost all of the alchemists were messing around with urine and how it reacted with different elements and temperatures. The stone of the alchemists also have two version, the white and red version. Conveniently, there are two major forms of phosphorus, white and red. It is easily extracted from urine and the color changes from the black-red-white as many of the alchemy texts of old mention these color changes. There are old alchemy stories of the stone vanishing/disappeared out of thin air, which phosphorus is able to self ignite/explode (duh). The red phosphorus is made by further heating the white phosphorus, which some of the old alchemy text mention how you can continue heating until you reach the red stage, if that is your wish. Of course we all know how important phosphorus is for plant growth/cell health for humans. It seems the most common and easy method for obtaining it is through urine. The alchemists always mentioned the substance they worked with being "vile" to the average person. The BOA mentions the use of urine, I am not here to comment on the method mentioned in the BOA, but it is true that alchemists have always worked with so called "waste" to bring forth the most important things.

Thoughts ?

ArcherSage
10-08-2017, 12:54 AM
The Rosicrucians, the brotherhood of light...the ones who searched for the light of God in the world. In this image you can see the red side, and the white side representing phosphorus in its main two forms. The light emitted from it must have been a spiritual experience for the alchemist, especially the christian alchemist. Interestingly, certain illnesses such as diabetes etc can cause the phosphorus levels in the body to drop too low. Phosphorus is extremely important to cellular and bone health (leading to homeopathy making cell salt plasma which contains phosphates for everyday consumption). It is used to create new blood, it is used to create ENERGY (energy is all that matters, you need energy to think, to exercise, to work, to be creative..wasting energy through means such as ejaculation, is a waste of phosphorus)

http://www.alchemywebsite.com/images/magnum.gif

John Bane
10-08-2017, 01:23 AM
Main idea of experiments with urine was not working with waste but cathing up a life force. The stone itself may be made from few substances. The most important thing is life giving force, condenced in the substance we work with. Thats why gold and black sand, mercury etc are good as well if you have a proper knowledge how to catch that main essence that may be turned into state of conciousness.

ArcherSage
10-08-2017, 01:33 AM
I always said the stone has to be made of something that we already know of. The alchemist believed everything was made of the same ONE single substance. The fact is, almost everything contains MORE than one substance in common. GOLD is not that great for you, and if the stone is made OF gold or FROM gold, then it has no value other than financial. This is why the elixir was more important than a solid object/stone. The elixir was consumed, many alchemy text mention the goal being the attainment of the liquid/spring/fluid/river etc. However I think what they were consuming was likely more of a SUPER vitamin/mineral drink that restored and preserved energy. Gold/Silver/Lead which are what most people associate with alchemy, have little or no use health wise for the human, often times it is detrimental to your health. This is why I think what they were consuming had nothing to do with gold/lead/silver or any solid form of anything. Spagyrics and the extraction of SALT (phosphates/phosphorus) and essential OILS is a reasonable goal, and is backed by science. Phosphates are indeed essential, and the oils have many great uses. Alchemy should be practical

ArcherSage
10-08-2017, 01:38 AM
I imagine they viewed the phosphorus as the literal light of God within nature. Phosphorus is also extracted from PLANTS and soil, which is why you need to restore the soil its phosphorus levels that were used by the plant. Spagyrics in essence, is the extraction of phosphates through various means.

JDP
10-08-2017, 08:57 AM
I am sure you all know the story of how Phosphorus was discovered, almost all of the alchemists were messing around with urine and how it reacted with different elements and temperatures. The stone of the alchemists also have two version, the white and red version. Conveniently, there are two major forms of phosphorus, white and red. It is easily extracted from urine and the color changes from the black-red-white as many of the alchemy texts of old mention these color changes. There are old alchemy stories of the stone vanishing/disappeared out of thin air, which phosphorus is able to self ignite/explode (duh). The red phosphorus is made by further heating the white phosphorus, which some of the old alchemy text mention how you can continue heating until you reach the red stage, if that is your wish. Of course we all know how important phosphorus is for plant growth/cell health for humans. It seems the most common and easy method for obtaining it is through urine. The alchemists always mentioned the substance they worked with being "vile" to the average person. The BOA mentions the use of urine, I am not here to comment on the method mentioned in the BOA, but it is true that alchemists have always worked with so called "waste" to bring forth the most important things.

Thoughts ?

Nonsense. Phosphorus is too reactive, it spontaneously self-ignites in contact with air, too difficult to handle for the ancient alchemists, who would not have had the adequate equipment and experimental techniques to tinker with such a substance. It was also only discovered accidentally in the 17th century by a chymist who thought he was on the right track regarding alchemy (but he obviously wasn't, and never succeeded in making anything with his discovery except selling the method of how to prepare it to other chymists; and this source of income for him was over pretty soon when other better methods to make it were discovered.) On top of that, phosphorus does not match the descriptions of the alchemists (where is the secret solvent or "water" and its peculiarities that fills hundreds and hundreds of pages of alchemical literature in any of this TOTALLY VULGAR CHYMICAL AFFAIR???), and, to top it all off, it does not effect any transmutation when cast upon molten metals (it only forms easily decomposed phosphides with them.)

ArcherSage
10-08-2017, 06:55 PM
The secret solvent IS the urine, urine is a great tool for breaking down materials if its content is acidic enough. They also mention purifying this solvent because it was originally tainted or contaminated, they were purifying urine. The alchemist who discovered phosphorus was likely not the first alchemist to find it. Odds are, some alchemists many hundreds of years before had found this glowing stone and had kept it secret through various metaphorical texts, until later the alchemist who "discovered" it revealed it to the world, rendering alchemy obsolete. And you claim that I am wrong based on what ? What alchemy texts are objective and clear ? If the process was clear in ANY text, it would have been done thousands of times by modern alchemist. The fact is, phosphorus was a huge deal when they were messing around with it. It matches the white and red stage, the black stage happens simply by boiling the urine, which creates a sort of syrup. It matches description of the material vanishing into thin air. And the original substance where the work begins was said to be vile, and disgusting to the public. They did not want people knowing they were experimenting with urine and feces (which some texts are flat out admitting both of these to be the case, even storing material within stool samples as a heating method) . This is likely the true story of the stone, they wanted to keep this mysterious substance that was extracted from urine a secret. Its funny how so many modern alchemist argue and debate as if any of them know a single truth, in reality they all debate regarding subjective texts that do not make anything clear and precise. Its like a Muslim and a Christian arguing over who's text is more holy or divine. So many alchemist blindly believe the methods have been revealed through allegory, and some say its plain as day written in clear steps..yet nobody can achieve this. Phosphorus being the stone makes so much more sense, as the material was not really known until not too long ago, meaning for hundreds of years before they were secret experimenting with it. The other thing is the salt separates from the blackness, which is another stage mentioned in several texts (separating the black and white then re uniting them again later). The urine process will naturally produce the separation of the black and the white. Please explain the wonderful process of making the stone, and tell me what the stone is made of, and tell me if the stone is ingested or is used to produce gold, or all of the above.

They also discuss this substance rising from the ground to the heavens, and needs to be captured because of its elusive nature. It has to be captured from urine, or from soil deposits, as it is not easy to find places to mine phosphorus (at least back then)

https://www.environmental-research.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/phosphor.jpg
http://images.slideplayer.com/12/3513896/slides/slide_7.jpg


Here is your stone

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/1941/2017/05/30163438/phosphorus2.jpeg

Maybe they thought this was the gold ? Some texts state the stone being a powder at one stage (and even the final stage), which of course phosphorus can be that as well
http://images.slideplayer.com/12/3515292/slides/slide_5.jpg

ArcherSage
10-08-2017, 07:05 PM
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2862786/

Maybe I am wrong, this study suggest excess phosphorus may accelerate aging

zoas23
10-08-2017, 11:51 PM
I agree with JDP... It's not simply because of historical reasons, but because it doesn't make sense... except for some minor details which are somehow meaningless (a white and a red "version"... and that it glows).
Last week you had an idea related to electricity, this week it is phosphorus...

Other than that, some things of JDP's reply are surprising to me, but I will write to him in private with an idea (an idea for the forum, not really an alchemical idea).

ArcherSage
10-09-2017, 02:17 AM
Yes, the electricity was my attempt at being subjective and vague as humanely possible :cool: This thread was my opinion on what the alchemists BELIEVED was the stone, and what they were factually discovering based on what we KNOW they were experimenting with. BTW the phosphorus can also be extracted from semen or other bodily fluids. The electricity thing has more to do with my view on the spiritual nature of it all. The "great work" and the true alchemical process may indeed be purely physical. However alchemy as an art of transmuting and transforming energy into other forms (which is what they were doing, as all things contain energy, consume/eat energy, and emit it in various forms). Whatever you are working with, must be made of energy and is susceptible to outside energy. There is a method of renewing energy that I was referring to when I mentioned electricity, however it has nothing to do with the stone, but everything to do with transmutation.

JDP
10-09-2017, 10:54 AM
The secret solvent IS the urine, urine is a great tool for breaking down materials if its content is acidic enough. They also mention purifying this solvent because it was originally tainted or contaminated, they were purifying urine. The alchemist who discovered phosphorus was likely not the first alchemist to find it. Odds are, some alchemists many hundreds of years before had found this glowing stone and had kept it secret through various metaphorical texts, until later the alchemist who "discovered" it revealed it to the world, rendering alchemy obsolete. And you claim that I am wrong based on what ? What alchemy texts are objective and clear ? If the process was clear in ANY text, it would have been done thousands of times by modern alchemist. The fact is, phosphorus was a huge deal when they were messing around with it. It matches the white and red stage, the black stage happens simply by boiling the urine, which creates a sort of syrup. It matches description of the material vanishing into thin air. And the original substance where the work begins was said to be vile, and disgusting to the public. They did not want people knowing they were experimenting with urine and feces (which some texts are flat out admitting both of these to be the case, even storing material within stool samples as a heating method) . This is likely the true story of the stone, they wanted to keep this mysterious substance that was extracted from urine a secret. Its funny how so many modern alchemist argue and debate as if any of them know a single truth, in reality they all debate regarding subjective texts that do not make anything clear and precise. Its like a Muslim and a Christian arguing over who's text is more holy or divine. So many alchemist blindly believe the methods have been revealed through allegory, and some say its plain as day written in clear steps..yet nobody can achieve this. Phosphorus being the stone makes so much more sense, as the material was not really known until not too long ago, meaning for hundreds of years before they were secret experimenting with it. The other thing is the salt separates from the blackness, which is another stage mentioned in several texts (separating the black and white then re uniting them again later). The urine process will naturally produce the separation of the black and the white. Please explain the wonderful process of making the stone, and tell me what the stone is made of, and tell me if the stone is ingested or is used to produce gold, or all of the above.

They also discuss this substance rising from the ground to the heavens, and needs to be captured because of its elusive nature. It has to be captured from urine, or from soil deposits, as it is not easy to find places to mine phosphorus (at least back then)

https://www.environmental-research.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/phosphor.jpg
http://images.slideplayer.com/12/3513896/slides/slide_7.jpg


Here is your stone

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/1941/2017/05/30163438/phosphorus2.jpeg

Maybe they thought this was the gold ? Some texts state the stone being a powder at one stage (and even the final stage), which of course phosphorus can be that as well
http://images.slideplayer.com/12/3515292/slides/slide_5.jpg

Urine is a complex mixture of substances, it has been known since remote times (obviously), unlike phosphorus, which is not easy to obtain from it (that can be easily seen by the fact that the first clear mention of it we have comes from the FAILED experiments of a 17th century chymist, not an alchemist, properly, who was trying to figure out the secrets of alchemy.) For hundreds of years before that, countless people also experimented with urine and obtained different byproducts from it, but failed to notice any production of phosphorus. And I am not talking only about the secretive type of experimenters, but also all those chymists who wrote very plainly. On top of that, soon after phosphorus became known we keep seeing that no one could prepare the Stone with it. So it proved to be just another dead-end.

I already explained why this idea of yours does not hold any water whatsoever. You are trying to appeal to the obscurity of many alchemical texts, but that mostly relates to the use of "decknamen" and other literary devices intended to make it less clear for "unworthy" seekers how the Stone was prepared, it does not mean that all alchemical literature is 100% unintelligible. We have plenty of descriptions of the processes and reactions that lead to the Stone, but always concealing the real proper names of the substances involved, and from them we can easily infer that they DO NOT match with the operations for obtaining phosphorus from urine, or with the characteristics of phosphorus itself. Your theory fails. Phosphorus is not the Philosophers' Stone even by a landslide.

Awani
10-09-2017, 11:25 AM
Your theory fails. Phosphorus is not the Philosophers' Stone even by a landslide.

What is the Stone then? Since you know what it is not, you must have some idea of what it is.

:p

JDP
10-09-2017, 01:47 PM
What is the Stone then? Since you know what it is not, you must have some idea of what it is.

:p

Whatever it is, it is obviously not phosphorus, a substance that does not share its peculiar properties.

Dwellings
10-09-2017, 05:36 PM
What is the Stone then? Since you know what it is not, you must have some idea of what it is.

:p

The stone is the Word of God.

Clearly phosphorous can't be the stone since Phosphorous must be God under such a situation. And Dev, you know what the stone is since you were a witness to all the great conversations that happened here.

Kibric
10-09-2017, 11:43 PM
Longevity Elixirs can be made from urine, but they are not the stone
there are Taoist and Hindu stories about people refusing to drink it
because its pee
they only really work depending on the diet of the persons urine
an extremely healthy person with a special diet (involving various plants and vegetables)
could make a longevity Elixir from their urine

as far as the Rosicrucian's go
the real ones
?????
they're planning for a golden age ?

ArcherSage
10-10-2017, 01:54 AM
Another reason the stone is phosphorus is because many texts state that there are two states in the process, one is VOLATILE (not stable), and the other is NOT. This is true with WHITE phosphorus which ignites when oxygen is present, red phosphorus however does NOT ignite at temperatures below like 400 degrees F. The texts state that they combined the volatile and non volatile into a fixed substance. Red phosphorus is a FIRE RETARDANT, the texts all state the final stone stage is red, and is immune to fire....it is all becoming clear, they were obsessed with phosphorus and were messing around with it, this is the most likely explanation. All of the traits of phosphorus DO match the stories of the stone, with the exception of the gold making which is likely purely false and misleading.

ArcherSage
10-10-2017, 02:14 AM
This text may have well been about phosphorus as well (maybe not about the stone, but possibly phosphorus related).
http://www.alchemywebsite.com/everbrn.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorescence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemiluminescence (what the text was likely about)

I think it is obvious that phosphorus regardless of if it was the stone or not, was a HUGE deal to the alchemists and was a closely held secret among them. Imagine walking into an alchemist lab back in the day before electricity, and seeing glowing stones/rocks/lamps that are not made of fire that maintain their brightness forever

JDP
10-10-2017, 09:32 AM
Another reason the stone is phosphorus is

What do you mean "another"? You haven't brought up even one that can withstand even superficial scrutiny.


because many texts state that there are two states in the process, one is VOLATILE (not stable), and the other is NOT. This is true with WHITE phosphorus which ignites when oxygen is present, red phosphorus however does NOT ignite at temperatures below like 400 degrees F.

Which YET AGAIN shows it cannot be the Stone, as that substance can withstand the fusion temperature even of metals like copper (1085 °C.) Not allotropic form of phosphorus can resist such temperatures. Your theory just keeps on failing, my friend.


The texts state that they combined the volatile and non volatile into a fixed substance. Red phosphorus is a FIRE RETARDANT, the texts all state the final stone stage is red, and is immune to fire...

The red allotropic form of phosphorus was unknown even to phosphorus' very own accidental discoverer, a "puffer" or "vulgar chymist" called Hennig Brand, who discovered white phosphorus precisely as a result of his experimental failures to figure out the secrets of alchemy. Red phosphorus was discovered in 1845 by an ordinary chemist called Anton Schrötter (who unlike the old alchemists had the appropriate means and knowledge of the composition of atmospheric air to be able to make such a discovery.) Your naive theory keeps on failing.

Oh, and red phosphorus is such a great "fire retardant" that its very first uses were in fact in MAKING BETTER AND SAFER MATCHES. You keep on failing, my friend.


it is all becoming clear,

that your theory can't withstand even basic historical and empirical scrutiny.


they were obsessed with phosphorus and were messing around with it,

How could they have been "obsessed" about something they did not even know it existed???


this is the most likely explanation.

In your mind, maybe, but not to anyone better acquainted with the subject.


All of the traits of phosphorus DO match the stories of the stone,

Nope, they don't. Phosphorus = easily flammable and volatile; Philosophers' Stone = the total opposite. And that is just one of the many obvious contrasts between the Stone and that TOTALLY ORDINARY CHEMICAL substance.


with the exception of the gold making which is likely purely false and misleading.

In other words, with the exception of its most obvious and talked about characteristic, the one that is the most intrinsic to the very definition of the Philosophers' Stone, which since it is not found in any COMMON SUBSTANCE KNOWN TO ORDINARY CHEMISTRY,LIKE PHOSPHORUS, you very conveniently and casually throw out the window in a desperate effort to give your obviously erroneous theory some sort of chance of holding water. ***Tsk-Tsk*** MAJOR FAIL!

Kibric
10-10-2017, 10:36 AM
the one that is the most intrinsic to the very definition of the Philosophers' Stone, which since it is not found in any COMMON SUBSTANCE KNOWN TO ORDINARY CHEMISTRY
but it is known by everyone , trodden , despised , praised etc
people have written

there's a quote i will try to track down but paraphrasing badly from memory
" men rarely see her in her second coat, which is transparent and clear "
i think it explains a bit about men see her and do not recognise her
if it jogs anyone memory let us know


***Tsk-Tsk*** MAJOR FAIL!
along with Captain Obvious and General Safety they protect the world

JDP
10-10-2017, 11:11 AM
but it is known by everyone , trodden , despised , praised etc
people have written

That can hardly refer to phosphorus, since that substance wasn't known to the ancients. Plus the above conundrum refers to one of the substances that enters the operations for making the Stone, which "as is" also does not transmute many times its own weight of base metals into silver and gold. A substance that can accomplish such a feat does not exist anywhere in nature. It is the product of human artifice. So the Stone itself doesn't really exist anywhere until it is purposefully prepared by man. You might say it only exists "potentially" (in the substances used to compose it) in nature. But you can say the same about just any other artificial product. For example, TNT exists "potentially" in nature, since the raw materials to make it can be found in many places, but it does not actually exist until the intelligent hand of man intervenes and causes the right conditions and reactions to happen. Nature itself, on its own, cannot make such a thing, despite producing all the raw matters necessary.

ArcherSage
10-10-2017, 11:07 PM
We know when it was officially discovered, but the odds are alchemist before had discovered white phosphorus, and in turn discovered red phosphorus with increased heating of the white. I think my theory matches perfectly with the color described as well as "some" of the traits. Of course phosphorus does not make gold, therefore it must not be the stone right ? Despite the fact that nobody has proven that any of the text accurately describe ANY process of producing gold. Odds are much of the text are fluff content because they found some cool glowing red stone and they told everyone they could make gold, and maybe the yellow version of phosphorus had been found before and assumed to be gold. Either way, my theory cannot "fail" if you cannot tell me how the stone is made. The text are subjective.

zoas23
10-10-2017, 11:23 PM
We know when it was officially discovered, but the odds are alchemist before had discovered white phosphorus, and in turn discovered red phosphorus with increased heating of the white. I think my theory matches perfectly with the color described as well as "some" of the traits. Of course phosphorus does not make gold, therefore it must not be the stone right ? Despite the fact that nobody has proven that any of the text accurately describe ANY process of producing gold. Odds are much of the text are fluff content because they found some cool glowing red stone and they told everyone they could make gold, and maybe the yellow version of phosphorus had been found before and assumed to be gold. Either way, my theory cannot "fail" if you cannot tell me how the stone is made. The text are subjective.

It is possible to assume that Phosphorus was a secret among alchemists since the origins of alchemy.
Pick any text of your choice and explain it by using Phosphorus... you will end up noticing that at some given point it won't make sense.

You can try to explain the "12 keys of the phosphorus" by Basil Valentine with an explanation of each step...
Or the anonymous "Recreations of the Phosphorus".
Or The "Triumphant chariot of the Phosphorus" by Basil Valentine.
Or "The secret book of the phosphorus" by Artephius
Or Agricola's "Treatise on the Phosphorus"... etc, etc....

You will end up understanding that something doesn't match with those matches.

Michael Sternbach
10-11-2017, 03:25 AM
Dear ArcherSage

I hate to say it, but Phosphorus can not be the Stone. You can't find the Stone anywhere on the periodic table (at least not without extending it in peculiar ways).

The Stone is a kind of exotic matter that has the capacity to attune your body and mind to what Nikola Tesla called "the wheel work of Nature". In other words, the Stone acts as a catalyzer for receiving the Universal Spirit, and it is this very spirit that potentially has the reported effects such as healing virtually any ailment, prolonging life indefinitely, and so on.

Thus, Phosphorus, important as without a doubt its function is in the human body, especially in regard of biophotons, is NOT the Stone - although perhaps it could serve as a foundation for making the Stone.

JDP
10-11-2017, 10:21 AM
We know when it was officially discovered, but the odds are alchemist before had discovered white phosphorus, and in turn discovered red phosphorus with increased heating of the white. I think my theory matches perfectly with the color described as well as "some" of the traits. Of course phosphorus does not make gold, therefore it must not be the stone right ? Despite the fact that nobody has proven that any of the text accurately describe ANY process of producing gold. Odds are much of the text are fluff content because they found some cool glowing red stone and they told everyone they could make gold, and maybe the yellow version of phosphorus had been found before and assumed to be gold. Either way, my theory cannot "fail" if you cannot tell me how the stone is made. The text are subjective.

Alchemists did no make vacuums inside their flasks (the majority of alchemists were in fact Aristotelians who rejected the very idea of a vacuum; "Nature abhors a vacuum", as Aristotle thought), they also did not know that atmospheric air was in fact a mixture of several very different gases that could actually be separated from each other (this was only finally realized by the investigations of 18th century chemists), so making red phosphorus would have been unknown to them, even if they had known the much more reactive white phosphorus. The fact that it took more than 170 years for chemists to finally figure out how to prepare red phosphorus should already give you an idea that this was not an easy task. The right amount of knowledge and experience had to be accumulated to finally be able to prepare it. The alchemists simply lacked the knowledge and apparatuses necessary to accomplish this task. They worked with different methods and substances.

Also, the sequence of colors of the "coction" of the Stone is incorrect, as it goes from black, to white, to red, passing through many other colors in between both extremes. Plus on top of that we know from the alchemists' descriptions that a mysterious liquid (i.e. the secret solvent or "water") is involved in this "coction" and that it COAGULATES into the Stone (together with its appropriate "earth" or "sulphur".) None of it fits with a solid whitish flammable substance like phosphorus being heated in the absence of oxygen and turning red. It does not hold water. Sorry.

And several of the 17th-18th century "chymists" have in fact pretty plainly explained how small amounts of gold can be made from silver through certain processes, so if what motivates you is the idea of transmutation being a "fairy tale", think again. There is nothing remotely "impossible" about it. I myself have many times replicated some of these "chymical" processes and obtained small amounts of silver from lead, bismuth, copper, etc. and small amounts of gold from silver. And NO, it was NOT any "impurities", the metals and reagents used in the above mentioned processes do NOT contain any silver or gold in them, yet at the end of the "chymical" operations you always get a small amount of the precious metals. Why else do you think that I invest so much money and time into researching alchemy and "transmutational chymistry"? It is not because of "blind faith" in anyone's word, that's for sure, since I don't believe in blind faith to begin with (I consider it utter foolishness; "never believe in anything you cannot prove yourself or that you are not given convincing proof of by someone else", that's my philosophy), but because I KNOW HOW REAL THE WHOLE THING IS. Many years ago I too was very skeptical about transmutation, since at that time all my efforts at making any artificial silver or gold had concluded in failure. But after persevering and further deeper investigation, I stumbled upon some of these "proofs" of transmutation in the old "chymical" literature. Some of them were total baloney, yet other ones proved to be VERY REAL. That's what totally changed my mind on the subject, certainly not any "blind faith" on anything. Empirical proof, baby! The rest is BS and empty boasts. Like the old saying says: "Money Talks, BS Walks!"

http://musicpleer.audio/#!ab53a259b85459f01c9f57faffb8df28

theFool
10-11-2017, 11:12 AM
I myself have many times replicated some of these "chymical" processes and obtained small amounts of silver from lead, bismuth, copper, etc. and small amounts of gold from silver. And NO, it was NOT any "impurities", the metals and reagents used in the above mentioned processes do NOT contain any silver or gold in them, yet at the end of the "chymical" operations you always get a small amount of the precious metals. Have you ever thought how this "chymical" transmutation could be explained from a scientific point of view? According to nuclear physics, you have to change the nucleus of the silver atom in order to make gold. Since you seem to have a thorough knowledge of science, I wonder what is your idea of how could this happen.

JDP
10-11-2017, 12:14 PM
Have you ever thought how this "chymical" transmutation could be explained from a scientific point of view? According to nuclear physics, you have to change the nucleus of the silver atom in order to make gold. Since you seem to have a thorough knowledge of science, I wonder what is your idea of how could this happen.

I know, it does not fit with those theories of modern science, yet it is quite real! That's why I have lost a lot of "respect" (for lack of a better word) for many of the postulates of physics and modern chemistry. Their "laws" are simply generalizations and assumptions based on the phenomena that THEY ARE aware of, but unfortunately for their views there's still plenty of other empirical facts that THEY ARE NOT aware of or simply dismiss (because they are inconvenient for their theories/speculations and so-called laws.) For a long time I too was puzzled as to how could so many of those old "chymists" be so convinced about the reality of metallic transmutation, but after stumbling upon some of these positive processes the whole thing has become very clear. Those guys DID obtain small amounts of silver and gold from substances where there were none before. There is no "mystery" why they were so convinced of it. I am now totally convinced that "chemistry" did not bother at all to make a systematic empirical investigation of the subject, and instead ended up just dismissing transmutation based on the ordinary and basic chemical processes it knows and handles. It just ASSUMES that all reactions between substances supposedly obey the same "internal" mechanisms ("electron shells", "valence", and so forth) and therefore if one reaction does not cause any transmutation, then none will. BIG MISTAKEN GENERALIZING ASSUMPTION! It turns out that "reactions" are not as "egalitarian" as many think, and some have deeper "repercussions" on the intervening metals than others.

theFool
10-11-2017, 02:31 PM
Thanks for the reply.


BIG MISTAKEN GENERALIZING ASSUMPTION! It turns out that "reactions" are not as "egalitarian" as many think, and some have deeper "repercussions" on the intervening metals than others. I agree with your views. For some reason they tend to generalize their laws into everything, thus blocking the new research.

Kibric
10-13-2017, 07:48 PM
That can hardly refer to phosphorus, since that substance wasn't known to the ancients.
i didn't mean phosphorus in particular , just that its described as being well known so chemistry even back then must of already known it
but been blind to it


A substance that can accomplish such a feat does not exist anywhere in nature. It is the product of human artifice. So the Stone itself doesn't really exist anywhere until it is purposefully prepared by man
man only gives nature a microcosm to work in


the right conditions and reactions to happen. Nature itself, on its own, cannot make such a thing, despite producing all the raw matters necessary.
all man does is speed up natures work
the right conditions and reactions do occur natrually
the whole work is following these conditions for the reactions to occur in a microcosm
the only thing the alchemist really does
is use the proper application of heat and separate the Oil from the earth when necessary
this applies to all different methods
they are all just applications of different heats and separation of water and earth at different stages

JDP
10-14-2017, 08:04 AM
all man does is speed up natures work
the right conditions and reactions do occur natrually
the whole work is following these conditions for the reactions to occur in a microcosm

If that was true then we should expect to find the Stone already made somewhere in nature, but it is well known by everyone that such a thing does not happen. The reason is plainly because nature simply can't make this thing, anymore than it can make TNT, or teflon, or Coca-Cola, or any of the myriad other substances that are made by man's ingenuity out of the raw matters that nature provides.


the only thing the alchemist really does
is use the proper application of heat and separate the Oil from the earth when necessary
this applies to all different methods
they are all just applications of different heats and separation of water and earth at different stages

That's one of the simplistic ideas that some malicious and envious writers would like you to think so that you get caught in a blind alley and hopefully never manage to get out of it. In reality it is a bit more complex than that. The secret solvent or "water" has to be prepared out of the appropriate "Chaos", or "Magnesia", or "Sericon", or "Antimony", or "Saturn", or "Azoquean Vitriol", or whatever other code-name you want to call it, which is a peculiar mixture of substances in the right proportions, and which does NOT occur anywhere in nature, therefore it is hopeless to go around looking for it somewhere already made for your convenience. Without knowing this initial part (i.e. the composition of this "Magnesia", "Sericon", "Azoquean Vitriol", etc.), you are simply lost and will never succeed in alchemy.

Kibric
10-14-2017, 11:24 PM
i respect your views but kindly disagree

there are texts that are written deliberatly to confuse
which others back then were perpetually irritated by
" 400 years to understand villanova " a quote that made me laugh

apologises for getting off topic

JDP
10-15-2017, 10:02 AM
i respect your views but kindly disagree

If you think you can find the Stone already made somewhere in nature then show us where exactly is it that you think you have proof that nature has made such a thing. Show us a miner or prospector who has found samples of the Stone already made somewhere in this planet.


there are texts that are written deliberatly to confuse

Indeed, like the "all you need is one matter only", and the "all you need is a mild heat", and the "all you need is one vessel", and the "all you need is one furnace" peddlers.

ArcherSage
10-15-2017, 08:08 PM
If you think you can find the Stone already made somewhere in nature then show us where exactly is it that you think you have proof that nature has made such a thing. Show us a miner or prospector who has found samples of the Stone already made somewhere in this planet.



Indeed, like the "all you need is one matter only", and the "all you need is a mild heat", and the "all you need is one vessel", and the "all you need is one furnace" peddlers.

Show me that the stone exists within nature or artificially.

JDP
10-16-2017, 10:05 AM
Show me that the stone exists within nature or artificially.

When I succeed in preparing it, or if a sample of it already prepared by someone else ever falls into my hands by whatever chance, I will be in a position to show you or anyone else.

But one thing is for sure: nature DOES NOT make it on its own. Otherwise plenty of people would have found it already made somewhere in a natural setting, like a deposit in some mine, for example. But no such thing has ever happened.