Patrons of the Sacred Art

Can't log in? Contact Us

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

+ Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Results 111 to 119 of 119

Thread: Difference between Alkahest and the Universal Mercury (SM).

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    462
    A possible theory.

    I think what some of the old masters are referring to here is the SPIRITUS VINI that is
    used to extract the OIL / SULFUR.... then when separated can be used again for
    other extractions.

    Examples of this can be found in Basil Valentines TRIUMPHAL CHARIOT.

  2. #112
    Whilst the literature gives a complex view I appreciate the pointers provided. Personally I am certain that some of these lesser solvents can be reclaimed but I have read that the solvent that can dissolve gold is not recycled.

    I think what Andro was saying about how some metals are easier to act on then others ties in with Jean Dubuis Kabbalistic approach to this issue. His approach which I oversimplify here was that by ascribing metals to the tree of life and atrributing methods and solvents to the Otz Chim also, we can produce a taxonomy of what can dissolve which metal.

    Personally I like the view that the main point is how much of this universal Mercury is present and how much 'bite' it has. I look forward to the possibility of directly feeling it and then afterward going around and inspecting various objects with this new understanding as zoas23 described.

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Axismundi000 View Post
    Whilst the literature gives a complex view I appreciate the pointers provided. Personally I am certain that some of these lesser solvents can be reclaimed but I have read that the solvent that can dissolve gold is not recycled.
    Many solvents can dissolve SOME matters, remain "intact" and be recovered as they were before the solution. For example, water can dissolve many salts, or sugars, and you can get the water as well as the solute back as they were before the solution. But these solvents are truly only acting as a mere solvent, nothing else. They do nothing to the things they dissolve. This is a very different case than the "alkahest". This solvent also "reduced" all substances it dissolved back to their "elements" and yet it itself remained intact! You supposedly could keep on "recycling" it for decomposing more substances into their "elements" over and over again. It would never be affected itself, yet it affected all the substances it dissolved. The whole thing sounds highly unlikely. Many alchemists and chymists tried to prepare it, but failed. The already quoted Weidenfeld tried during his younger years to obtain it, when he himself had been caught in the confusion between it and the secret solvent of alchemy, yet he could never prepare it, and after he realized the obvious difference between it and the secret solvent of alchemy he ended up rejecting the "alkahest" as the conjectural idea of some writers. Kunckel also scoffed at the idea of the "alkahest" or "universal solvent" and pointed out the conundrum that if it supposedly dissolves and decomposes everything it comes in contact with, then how could it possibly be prepared and contained in the first place, as it would dissolve & decompose the very apparatuses used for the purpose!
    Last edited by JDP; 05-10-2017 at 07:33 AM.

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,705
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Andro View Post
    I have personally never prepared/encountered/witnessed a substance that "extracts the (genuine) Quintessence" of any subject and remains unchanged in the process.
    Everything depends of what you call Qe.

    I call Qe a volatilized Sulfur.
    There, the Radical Mercury used stays the same. But sometimes, but the use of it, it will loose some of its power and need to be renewed by the same process it was born.


    Quote Originally Posted by Andro View Post
    AFAIK, the closest thing the Philosophical Mercury comes to 'extracting' something, is in one particular instance, at the very end of the Second Rotation, where the Philosophical Sulfur is separated/extracted from its earth/matrix and subsequently floats on top of the Philosophical Mercury (which is in liquid form) that was used for its extraction/separation.
    As far as I can say, there, the "Universal Mercury" will not loose its power in the process because of its 100% radical nature, and extremely fix capacity to stay almost the same, even under very strong conditions.
    There is a trick in order to make move up the prepared Sulfur.

    In the process, the Sulfur is completely swallowed, and makes one with the Rad Mercury. Then, after a "trick", the Sulfur comes up, floating on the surface, prepared and purified, ready to be used.

    Without the "trick", the Sulfur will sink down, and progressively make one with the Mercury, and will not be recovered floating after that. And the process to revover/purify the Mercury will be more tedious and long.

    I also wanted to say that the Rad Mercury, depending of its nature and confection will alway "reject" (when used properly) in its own way the Sulfur prepared. And will remain clean after that.

    Also a fact is that, with some Radical Mercuries, I had the surprise to witness several PH in the same solution : PH 4 5 6 7 8 9. Not neutralizing themselves !
    Salazius

    http://dartigne.blogspot.com/

    My Works

    "I want to transmute everywhere" ~ The Spirit of Alchemy.

  5. #115
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,286
    Blog Entries
    104
    I like Andro's thoughts here, I would bet that a lot of people would be working on gold in it's pure state, or, perhaps a gold calx of sorts, m-state ect...

    But what about gold in it's mineral form? In these forms the gold atoms are more evenly spread out amount other atoms ie: easier to isolate for a given solvent. (This coul be considered as a "lesser" metal, in regards to the spiritus, and in terms of it's extract-ability)

    Now, if we take a nicely prepared gold calx - white, Don Vance or the Fool style, then we mix with fresh Aqua Regis, and reflux, ten the gold becomes a brilliant green crystal/mineral, and I would expect, that a true Quintessense of gold should be extracted by the universal solvent via the U. S.

    Again, just my theories, but doesn't the green lion come before the red?
    Good bye most of humanity.

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,002
    Quote Originally Posted by elixirmixer View Post
    I like Andro's thoughts here, I would bet that a lot of people would be working on gold in it's pure state, or, perhaps a gold calx of sorts, m-state ect...

    But what about gold in it's mineral form? In these forms the gold atoms are more evenly spread out amount other atoms ie: easier to isolate for a given solvent. (This coul be considered as a "lesser" metal, in regards to the spiritus, and in terms of it's extract-ability)

    Now, if we take a nicely prepared gold calx - white, Don Vance or the Fool style, then we mix with fresh Aqua Regis, and reflux, ten the gold becomes a brilliant green crystal/mineral, and I would expect, that a true Quintessense of gold should be extracted by the universal solvent via the U. S.

    Again, just my theories, but doesn't the green lion come before the red?
    Gold rarely forms actual minerals because of its low reactivity, that's why it's a "noble" metal. Most gold found in nature is metallic, either "pure" or in the form of alloys with some other metals. That's also why gold is one of the oldest known metals. It didn't take any metallurgical technology for man to stumble upon it, he did not have to smelt it to have discovered it. Aluminum, on the other end of this scale, is never found in its metallic state in nature because of its high reactivity. Thus why it was only discovered as late as the 19th century. The technology had to be developed that could allow man to extract it out of its mineralized forms.

  7. #117
    The idea that this universal solvent is like the blood of the xenomorph in the Alien films, a universal corrosive, need not be true though the deductive reasoning put forward by JDP is pleasing. It is possible to argue that this universal solvent acts on different materials depending on how concentrated it is. So for example it doesn't act on glass but at a certain concentration will work on gold, at a lesser concentration on iron but not gold etc. Obviously this has no chemical basis and I am not a chemist.

    Salazius makes some interesting comments about how to recycle this solvent after it has dissolved gold. In which case it does have this property in common with these other 'alkahest' that do not dissolve gold but do dissolve other metals and also can be recycled.

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,705
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Axismundi000 View Post
    Salazius makes some interesting comments about how to recycle this solvent after it has dissolved gold. In which case it does have this property in common with these other 'alkahest' that do not dissolve gold but do dissolve other metals and also can be recycled.
    I wasn't pointing gold specifically.

    Just remember Fulcanelli. He said 'universal' because it dissolves our little microcosmus, or inferior astrology in fact. It is not an "all" solvent.

    Gold is easy to work with, true challenge comes with iron.
    Salazius

    http://dartigne.blogspot.com/

    My Works

    "I want to transmute everywhere" ~ The Spirit of Alchemy.

  9. #119
    Quote Originally Posted by Salazius View Post
    I wasn't pointing gold specifically.

    Just remember Fulcanelli. He said 'universal' because it dissolves our little microcosmus, or inferior astrology in fact. It is not an "all" solvent.

    Gold is easy to work with, true challenge comes with iron.
    Thank you for your comments and observations I shall give them carefull thought along with any others you may choose to make.

+ 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