Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

Patrons of the Sacred Art

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 78

Thread: The Mineral Identification Key

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    1,152
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    Number 3 is problematic because there are natural liquid substances that can't really be considered anything other than "mineral". Metallic mercury sometimes occurs in nature, and I don't think anyone will consider it "animal" or "vegetable" just because it is a liquid. Common water would also be quite difficult to be considered "animal" or "vegetable". Water existed before organic life. In fact, without it, organic life would likely have never evolved.
    As I said, water can be considered as a mineral when it is in a naturally solid state (ice or snow). As for mercury, that one is an oddball indeed. However it is never found naturally as a "pool". It only occurs as very small blobs on top of mercury ores such as cinnabar, where they are lodged in small crevices or pores. I don't make up the definitions - I'm just the messenger.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Illen A. Cluf View Post
    As I said, water can be considered as a mineral when it is in a naturally solid state (ice or snow). As for mercury, that one is an oddball indeed. However it is never found naturally as a "pool". It only occurs as very small blobs on top of mercury ores such as cinnabar, where they are lodged in small crevices or pores. I don't make up the definitions - I'm just the messenger.
    I know, but whoever made up that definition inserted a very questionable condition in number 3. Water and metallic mercury are liquid and they do not fit well in a "non-mineral" definition.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    246
    Hi Schmuldvich!
    My question was reffering to Fulcanelli. Z0 K was saying he and others played with coal. If I remember right your quote is from the Aurea Catena Homeri. I don't see a reason why "coal" should not be another decknamen like the many others.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    I know, but whoever made up that definition inserted a very questionable condition in number 3. Water and metallic mercury are liquid and they do not fit well in a "non-mineral" definition.
    Those definitions came up much later in history and are therefore not very useful here in my opinion. For example potash is nowadays considered as a mineral / anorganic compound. In former times most people put it in the drawer labelled with "vegetable kingdom".

  5. #45
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,558
    Blog Entries
    29
    I found the prima materia today. I worked it out last night, cryed and prayed, and then got a headlamp, went searching in a deep underground mine, and found the solidified fire.

    Thank God for answering my prayers and rewarding my boldness. (Deep cave shafts can be very scary)

    I will dissolve this in Mercury and rectify it.

    Then I shall have the Lapidum.
    Join me; on a voyage of stupidity, and self discovery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=vccZSHroTG4

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,061
    Can you show us a picture of your prima materia before you dissolve it?
    Formerly known as True Puffer

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Florius Frammel View Post
    Those definitions came up much later in history and are therefore not very useful here in my opinion. For example potash is nowadays considered as a mineral / anorganic compound. In former times most people put it in the drawer labelled with "vegetable kingdom".
    That's because in those times potash was obtained almost exclusively from organic sources (like the ashes of plants.)

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Florius Frammel View Post
    Hi Schmuldvich!
    My question was reffering to Fulcanelli. Z0 K was saying he and others played with coal. If I remember right your quote is from the Aurea Catena Homeri. I don't see a reason why "coal" should not be another decknamen like the many others.
    I find that theory quite unlikely. Fulcanelli's very own descriptions of the procedures he employed show that he worked with a method that at one point involved relatively "violent" reactions that would have pretty much vaporized or destroyed the volatile and flammable products contained in coals. At least one of the substances that he employed was a bona fide mineral (meaning a metal-containing mineral, not an organic-derived matter like coal.)

  9. #49

    Special subject described in the tract "Fontina Bernhardi Revelata"

    There is a German treatise entitled “Fontina Bernhardi Revelata” containing the following description of an interesting matter that could be found in nature:

    http://digital.slub-dresden.de/werkansicht/dlf/50984/6/

    (..) Discourse of a certain undetermined special subject, as a wonder magnet.
    At all places and ends of our whole globe, that is within a fat and loamy ground that is fully impregnated by the fiery salt of nature, or the stars, and that’s why, it draws continuously from the air the salty balsam of life like a strong magnet, is born, influentia astrorum perpetua, a certain subject that owns the shape of potatos. Its colour is greenish grey, is hard like a rock and when it is smashed into pieces it is thoroughly interwoven with sparkling golden asterisks or veins. It is twofold, solar and lunar. That is, because of its solar nature, the right thing and has golden veins; the lunar part, as the female part, has white veins, like silver, however isn’t used. It has no name except that Theophrastus Paracelsus had it named the old Domogorgon; Actually it is the true Magnesia Saturni of the Philosophers with which the Mercurius universalis, or even the Lapis Philosophorum could be attained.
    However it is very important to rightly recognize this subject otherwise one wouldn’t get the right one. Pyrite , minera vitrioli, minera martis solaris hassica or the so called Hassian Iron kidneys or ‘Hücken’ (there is no English word for it), which could be found at Allmenroda which is not far from Kassel and many other minerals the like resemble our subject almost in every detail, however aren’t by far: There is no person in the world who might be able to distinguish this subject from the others that resemble in shape - provided it will be revealed by a true friend. It might be examined as much as one wants, there isn’t within any metal although one would strongly expect that it might be full of solid gold due to its appearance; but there is nothing else than an alkaline, salty and mercurial Sulphur embryonatum.
    Last edited by Weidenfeld; 01-30-2018 at 01:11 PM.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,061
    What is the literal translation of the terms Martian regulus? It is the Regulus of Iron!
    Formerly known as True Puffer

+ Reply to 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