Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

Patrons of the Sacred Art

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Transmutation is real, but the stone won't save you

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,674
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    How could chemistry after all this time not have experimented with every possible combination/dissolution/coagulation in existence?
    There is approximatively known to man 6 millions molecules and chemical substances. Not one of them is the Stone nor close from it. And this is quite amazing.

    All of them are composed by 3 Radical Principles. This is even MORE amazing.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    To the physical alchemist, what is the "secret" that chemistry does not understand?
    - Repetitions.
    - Not forcing Nature.
    - Slow pace.
    - Long time.
    - Putrefaction.
    - Three Principles.
    - Spiritus.
    - Polarities in an Hermetic vision.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    A wise man once said, someone who cannot explain their craft to a 7 year old, does not understand their craft. This seems to be the case with almost everyone in the community,
    Yes, a wise man said that. Don't be so quick to give such an opinion. We have here very good fellows that know their stuff.
    No one need to reinvent the wheel everytime. "Fix the volatile." is the explanation. Sometime a single bird on a tree is suggesting that.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    Modern science has already achieved transmutation in more than one way, the problem is the philosophers stone is supposed to prevent one from dying.
    Actually it is not, it is offering another type of death. More *radical*.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    Does the final product of the stone produce a NEW substance that can cure/prevent aging, or is it simply using what already exists to achieve this?
    The final product of the Stone ? The Elixir ? No clear sorry.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    If so, why is it not known yet?
    It is.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    Obviously producing Gold wouldn't save your life (except financially), so the elixir must be the goal.
    A mean to an end more than a goal. And the goal is wider, wiser, wilder that anyone can imagine. Gold is a test of validity of the production.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    So what is the elixir made of?
    Of the Sulfur of the Stone, which is not the real interesting thing. It is more the load of energy that it can bear that is interesting.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    This energy survives death, no body can. I still do not understand why people think the body can live forever, as hermes even said in divine pymander that nothing in heaven is mortal, everything on earth mortal.
    Not even Paracelsus said it was forever. He said there is a natural limit given by God, according to him, that can go up to 900 years.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    The stone may be a real thing you can create, it has nothing to do with eternal life.
    It depends of the quality of the Stone and what you call "eternal life".


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    More than anything, Alchemy has become searching for a needle in a haystack driving oneself crazy, rather than looking internally.
    It depends, not everybody do that. I do Yoga, and prayers and self analysis.
    And if you don't look inside when working in the lab, then you do it wrong, because when it chews you, you can go anywhere else.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    I have yet to see anything close to what the physical alchemists claim is the stone or the elixir, conveniently nobody wants to share their "secrets" when in reality, years of research have yielded no results.
    Of course conveniently !

    It takes first to believe to see in Hermetics. Opening the mind to possibilities.
    By pure logic you can achieve the idea that the Stone is real, just by pure "alchemical equations". If you know how Nature Works then you can get a glimpse, maybe not all the details, but still.
    Salazius

    http://dartigne.blogspot.com/

    My Works

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

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Warmheart View Post
    All the possible combinations were done yet in the days of Paracelsus. People were throwing all kinds of things in their retorts and alembics but achieved nothing special.
    Not even by a long stretch. Just think of how many new substances have been prepared since those days that those old-timers knew nothing about. Yet, on the other hand, some people from those times, using their own methods, discovered and prepared things that modern chemists know rather little or nothing about. "Progress" is not always linear.

  3. #13
    Again I ask. Most of the texts state that this universal substance is extracted from ALL things, but is easier to extract from plants, hence the spagyrics. Meaning, this substance is within things that we already have, so its a matter of extraction, is this substance the stone ? Or is the stone something that you CREATE that does NOT yet exist until you perform xyz ?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,542
    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    Again I ask. Most of the texts state that this universal substance is extracted from ALL things, but is easier to extract from plants, hence the spagyrics. Meaning, this substance is within things that we already have, so its a matter of extraction, is this substance the stone ? Or is the stone something that you CREATE that does NOT yet exist until you perform xyz ?
    You need to differentiate between theories/speculations/conjectures and empirical facts. The old alchemists were interested in seeing their theories/speculations/conjectures about matter corroborated somehow, but the fact is that they had no shred of evidence for them, even if the Stone is real. It is no different than the theories of Aristotle or Descartes regarding gravity. They were observing real facts and speculating regarding what exactly was going on, why all things fall towards the center of the earth. The empirical fact here is the observable phenomenon (i.e. all objects in free fall go from the periphery of the earth towards the center in a straightforward accelerating motion), and what could cause it (whether it was a "pulling" or "pushing" force, whether it was that all objects "want" to seek their "natural" place, etc.) is the realm of speculation/theories/conjectures. Similarly, the alchemists desperately wanted to impose their "universalist" views on what they were actually doing in their labs. So we have all these specious and suspicious claims, like the matter of the Stone supposedly being found "everywhere", which is quite unlikely considering all the actual historical and empirical evidence we have.

  5. #15
    It makes more sense to me that there is something that can be extracted that is beneficial to your health, but isnt the fountain of youth. There are theories regarding oxidation and the process of death itself, oxidation of course causes rust, which is necessary to break down metals. Fire is a faster version of oxidation vs rust. You can turn your metal red simply with the four elements present, water+earth (salt water, conducts electricity), fire and air (fire is the electrochemical reaction, air is oxygen which causes ...oxidation lol. So simply allowing salt, water, and air to exist with a metal, you will get the red color they talk about. The old alchemists were probably blown away by the process of oxidation. Gold however will NEVER react with oxygen, so oxidation is not a useful tool for doing anything with gold. I don't even think any of this has to do with gold, rather they were describing various colors associated with different stages of oxidation on various metals, such as copper turning green. We also know that most metals can be mixed with mercury to create an amalgam, is this the stone ? They talk about various phases of color changes, but as I stated before, these can all be different stages of the same oxidation effect on certain things.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    The old alchemists were probably blown away by the process of oxidation. Gold however will NEVER react with oxygen, so oxidation is not a useful tool for doing anything with gold.
    Clearly you aren't versed in the things you talk about...

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold(III)_oxide

    So it's not surprising why you don't see results and thus believe errant ideas.
    One fatal tree there stands of knowledge called, forbidden them to taste. Knowledge forbidden? Suspicious. Reasonless. And why should their Lord envy them that? Can it be sin to know? Can it be death? And do they stand by ignorance, is that their happy state, the proof of their obedience and their faith?

  7. #17
    As I stated before, Gold does not rust. It is the least reactive to oxygen of all the metals. If it does react, then its not pure gold (mixed with other metals)

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,205
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Seth-Ra View Post
    Clearly you aren't versed in the things you talk about...

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold(III)_oxide

    So it's not surprising why you don't see results and thus believe errant ideas.
    Excuse me for interrupting the thread flow, but do you happen to know any chemical procedure (publication, book) on how to make the gold oxide or (gold nitrate or gold acetate)? Even if the compounds are being sold by some companies, the relevant recipies seem hard to find in chemical literature (at least for me).

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,542
    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherSage View Post
    As I stated before, Gold does not rust. It is the least reactive to oxygen of all the metals. If it does react, then its not pure gold (mixed with other metals)
    Gold does not rust on its own, true, but submitted to some chemical procedures it will form oxides. However, these oxides, unlike those of most other metals, are rather unstable and will decompose even by simple heating alone. That's why gold is a "noble" metal. It has a tendency to resist combining with other things, as if it "wants" to be on its own, therefore the analogy with the human "noble" class (who traditionally were not very disposed to "mingle" with the "lower" classes of society.)

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,542
    Quote Originally Posted by theFool View Post
    Excuse me for interrupting the thread flow, but do you happen to know any chemical procedure (publication, book) on how to make the gold oxide or (gold nitrate or gold acetate)? Even if the compounds are being sold by some companies, the relevant recipies seem hard to find in chemical literature (at least for me).
    You can find information about how to obtain gold oxides in several sources. Thomas Kirke Rose has some info on the subject in his book devoted to the metallurgy of gold, for example:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=iJ...ide%22&f=false

+ 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