Patrons of the Sacred Art

OPEN TO REGISTER: Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 29 of 29 FirstFirst ... 19 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Results 281 to 290 of 290

Thread: Secrecy & Alchemical Initiations

  1. #281
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    Yes, and if you have read Principe's books, even though he maintains an "official" academic stance and does not openly say he believes in transmutation, you can't help but feel that he himself has been engaged in experiments of the sort (I mean, besides the ones he openly talks about in his books.) Who knows if he has found out some of the working ones already, and just like many others who did so in the past, has been keeping this to himself to continue his own research on the subject. I know I have! But one day I will "break the silence" and smash the "vicious circle"...
    Maybe your projection method could be a start. I've seen a couple, and while the wax ball seems to align itself with primitive methods of forging alloys, I wonder how many errors are made in that part of the process alone. Till that time though, I'll continue to plug away with my processes's. Some have produced wonderful medicinal effects that I'll take alone. If nothing else is to come from my studies, finding amazing practical medicines will suffice.

  2. #282
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragon's Tail View Post
    Maybe your projection method could be a start. I've seen a couple, and while the wax ball seems to align itself with primitive methods of forging alloys, I wonder how many errors are made in that part of the process alone. Till that time though, I'll continue to plug away with my processes's. Some have produced wonderful medicinal effects that I'll take alone. If nothing else is to come from my studies, finding amazing practical medicines will suffice.
    The methods I have rediscovered so far are not of the kind you have in mind. You are talking about "projection" of a small amount of a "tincture" on a much larger amount of molten metal (which, by the way, leaves hardly any room for "error"; the weights don't lie, no matter how you make your "wax ball", the transmuting agent is always much smaller in weight than the amount of metal transmuted.) The methods I am talking about start, in the case of silver-making processes, with a given amount of a base metal or some alloys of them, or, in the case of gold-making processes, of silver or some alloys of silver, which are then submitted to a series of "chymical" treatments (they often involve repetition of the same procedures on the same metal or alloy many times, thus why they are so tedious and in the long run expensive to carry out; one process, for example, involves 12 fusions and reductions of a certain metal, or some of its alloys, with certain substances, and each operation takes several hours to carry out!), at the end of which the treated metal is assayed and then, to the delight of the investigator, it is found to contain some amount of silver or gold in it, but always very inferior in weight to that of the original metal or metals employed. I call these: "chymical transmutations", to distinguish them from those of alchemy properly (i.e. via "projection" of a small amount of a "tincture".) Unfortunately, all the ones rediscovered so far do not produce enough silver or gold to even pay for the expenses of carrying them out, so needless to say the operator makes ZERO profit, monetarily speaking. Intellectually speaking, though, he gains a true "fortune". He no longer has to work on blind faith, relying on other people's words. Now he KNOWS for a fact that transmutation is real, so there no longer is any fear, annoying doubts or anxiety about spending whatever amount of time and money it takes to keep on investigating the subject. I remember when I started investigating this subject I would sometimes go into fits of rage when I failed. Sometimes I would smash crucibles and bottles (yes, a la Thomas Charnock!) against the walls. All that time and money spent for NOTHING, as all the processes I kept trying were total bullshit, invented by either some charlatans and con-men in order to make a quick buck at someone else's expense (writing & selling supposedly "tested & true" processes was a business back in the day! Read the autobiographical accounts of Bernard Trevisan or Denis Zachaire, for example), or by some malicious chymists, who knew perfectly well that the processes they were writing would not work, but did so nonetheless just to make what they considered "unworthy people" waste their time and money. Several times I came close to quitting the whole thing and telling the alchemists and chymists to "go fuck yourselves!" One time I spent almost a whole year without lighting my furnaces and making any transmutation experiments, instead I devoted most of my time to making pyro powders and explosives. That's how fed up I was with failure, after failure, after failure... But in the long run unrelenting persistence paid off, and every now and then I started hitting on some of the processes that do work. That was a Game Changer.

    If that alleged bearded man in the sky really exists, may "He" bless all the "chymists" who every now and then wrote the plain truth (and some did, word for word, practically like a "recipe"!), or at least almost totally (some of them wrote basic truths, but you need to "tinker" and experiment a bit with what they say in order to figure out how to successfully carry out some of these processes) and open the "Pearly Gates" of "Paradise" to them. But may "He" also send straight to hell (if such a place actually exists) all the bastards who kept filling volumes and volumes with false processes. All the damage and sorrow they caused to countless seekers surely merits that such scoundrels be roasted alive for eternity, if such a punishment was possible.

  3. #283
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    600
    And here my theory about dew comes in play.
    Maybe some felt pity for those poor men losing everything and gave the guys a cheap occupation.
    Note: I would have nothing against the possibility that the true universal in fact is about dew. It would have quite some obvious advantages.

    _____________________

    Logistical Note: Continued HERE (Interesting Water Work Lineage)


    ------------------------------------------
    Last edited by Andro; 07-03-2018 at 11:33 AM. Reason: Moved post to relevant topic.

  4. #284
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    But may "He" also send straight to hell (if such a place actually exists) all the bastards who kept filling volumes and volumes with false processes. All the damage and sorrow they caused to countless seekers surely merits that such scoundrels be roasted alive for eternity, if such a punishment was possible.
    Don't be too hard on them. I've had this creeping suspicion that some of them, feeling they were close, began jotting down their process, finished off how they thought it was going to happen (seen some of them posts around here, too, right?) and these papers/journals/books were later discovered, or perhaps sold to pay for all that broken lab glass from smashing bottles against the wall, lol.

    I think you answered my question fairly though. I had "particular tinctures" in mind when I asked, and not the process. The only one I'm aware of involved some kind of hammering technique or something and seemed very dubious in it's origin. The creator seemed to either be playing dumb or genuinely a fool that didn't understand how to test and quantify matter. Though he did have receipts from selling his gold. I suspect he was ACTUALLY running some kind of ponzy scheme. Can't recall his name, end of the 1800's.

  5. #285
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragon's Tail View Post
    Don't be too hard on them. I've had this creeping suspicion that some of them, feeling they were close, began jotting down their process, finished off how they thought it was going to happen (seen some of them posts around here, too, right?) and these papers/journals/books were later discovered, or perhaps sold to pay for all that broken lab glass from smashing bottles against the wall, lol.
    Even those deserve the punishment. They wrote down their wished-for results as if they were proven "facts" when in fact they were not. Deceitful no matter how you want to cut it. Only after a process has been thoroughly tested, then and only then it can be slapped with the "probatum est" ("it has been proved/tested") label.

    I think you answered my question fairly though. I had "particular tinctures" in mind when I asked, and not the process. The only one I'm aware of involved some kind of hammering technique or something and seemed very dubious in it's origin. The creator seemed to either be playing dumb or genuinely a fool that didn't understand how to test and quantify matter. Though he did have receipts from selling his gold. I suspect he was ACTUALLY running some kind of ponzy scheme. Can't recall his name, end of the 1800's.
    You are thinking about Dr. Stephen Emmens. That guy was a smart cookie. He openly defied his critics, even challenging them to witness his process being carried out. However, the strict conditions he imposed on them were too much and they started inventing excuses not to accept his challenge. For example, in order to avoid them accusing the good doctor of "injecting gold gas" (!!!) into his machines, he would allow the witnesses to tear down the said machines and labs... but they would have to pay for all the damage, LOL! I love this guy! Why would he have to pay for other people's paranoias and absurd accusations??? If you want to tear down the premises to look for hidden "tubes" you can do so, but you are going to pay for all the reparations to put everything back together and in working order!

    Emmens knew very well how to test the materials he was employing in his process. It was that pompous chemist, William Crookes, who after repeating some of the procedures the doctor communicated to him did find an increase in the gold content of the Mexican silver dollars, yet started to invent excuses to try to dismiss it as an "error". Emmens put a damper on his excuses when he called Crookes out on his earlier boast that his analytical prowess was so accurate as to be free from error even involving quantities as little as 1-1000th of a grain. Bummer! as Crookes himself reported to Emmens that he had indeed obtained an increase in the gold contained in the Mexican dollar samples of 13-1000th of a grain by following the simple procedure that Emmens had outlined as a test (he never promised that he would disclose all the steps of his process to Crookes, only that he would give him a few pointers that would demonstrate the reality of the basic principles involved), result which Crookes then tried to dismiss as "unimportant" and "inconclusive" and the result of alleged "experimental errors".

    As for more details about Emmens' silver into gold mechanical-chemical process: the prolonged strong "hammering" at cold temperatures was only one part of the process. According to the information that Emmens communicated about his process here and there, it can be summarized as:

    1- Mechanical treatment

    2- Fluxing and granulation

    3- Mechanical treatment

    4- Treatment with modified nitric acid

    5- Refining

    The only part that he ever gave any significant details about was the one about the mechanical treatment (strong pressure + very low temperatures.) There is no information whatsoever regarding the "modified nitric acid" that he used in the operations. But anyone acquainted with the methods of the old "chymists" knows that those guys often employed what they usually called "gradatory aqua fortises" (i.e. aqua fortis prepared by more complex mixtures and procedures than the "vulgar" one) to obtain small amounts of gold from silver. So we can suspect that Emmens had his own take on such "chymical" processes.

  6. #286
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    526
    I heard the story a little differently, but I have not read the exchange of letters for myself, only references made by admitted skeptics, so no doubt their own opinions bled into the reports. One day I may go looking for the actual letters, just to see. It should all be in English so at least nothing to translate for me

  7. #287
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragon's Tail View Post
    I heard the story a little differently, but I have not read the exchange of letters for myself, only references made by admitted skeptics, so no doubt their own opinions bled into the reports. One day I may go looking for the actual letters, just to see. It should all be in English so at least nothing to translate for me
    See if you can get a hold of a copy of Emmens' exceedingly rare book: Argentaurana, Or, Some Contributions to the History of Science. He very conveniently collected all the articles he published on the subject as well as all the correspondence with Crookes there. If not, then you will have go "hunting" for all the newspaper and journal articles separately.

    You are likely referring to the likes of Kauffman and Brock, who try to do their best to distort the correspondence between Emmens and Crookes to try to make Emmens look like a clever conman, an idiot, a rude, paranoid, extravagant megalomaniac, or a combination of all these. In fact, it is rather Crookes who ends up looking like a combination of some of those "attributes". For example, regarding the accusation that Crookes launches against Emmens about breach of confidence (which in the end Crookes dishonestly used as an excuse to cease debating with Emmens), it was in fact Crookes who first violated their agreement, not Emmens, a fact which Emmens is not shy to rub in Crookes' face when he accuses him of doing so. Why should Emmens, then, stick to such a "gentleman's agreement" when in fact it was his correspondent who would not respect such things in the first place? I love it how Emmens makes Crookes look quite bad in basically all aspects of their exchanges in these letters, but at the same time he maintains his composure and keeps referring to him as an eminent authority, but with that hilarious mocking undertone that characterizes Emmens' wit; you know, like saying "this guy is a very recognized scientific authority, yet he absurdly believes in X", or "yet he absurdly tries to make up excuses for Y", or "yet he conveniently overlooks Z", etc. LOL! Gotta love that guy! His bold, defiant, no-apologies, in-your-face attitude towards the establishment and its self-proclaimed/appointed "authorities" should be an example to us all.

    BTW, an additional mystery regarding Emmens is: what in blazes happened to him? He seems to "disappear" without a trace during the early 1900s (the last known reference discovered so far is a letter of Emmens to Tiffereau dated in 1902.) So far no one seems to have been able to find out what became of him.

  8. #288
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Far Side
    Posts
    119
    It is so hard to say whether the nature of our art lies in the solitude of its practitioners, or if the nature of our practitioners finds its solitude in our art. Many would see them as one and the same. Often it seems evident the power thus wielded would strike the unknowing with material corruptions when the engulfed beast of hedonism raises its tired head and smells of it.

    This great fear of the corrupted nature of man has long been rebuked and hated by the alchemists whom generally speaking wished for the salvation of man, many looking for such salvation in our art. Many have fallen victims of a horrible end by starting out with the purest intention to quench thirst of man, for man in his thirst often takes more than he can drink.

  9. #289
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    886
    Quote Originally Posted by Aspiring Alkemist View Post
    "It is so hard to say whether the nature of our art lies in the solitude of its practitioners, or if the nature of our practitioners finds its solitude in our art."
    I love this! Awesome reflection, AA!

  10. #290
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Far Side
    Posts
    119
    Thank you !!!

    Came up with that one all by myself

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts