The Lost Academy

created for Alchemy-Illuminated.com and run by Nick Collette
 
HomeCalendarGalleryFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Glauber's "The Salt of Art"

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1 ... 12 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25  Next
AuthorMessage
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:03 pm

T.P. wrote:
By reading old texts of the philosophers like the ones posted in this thread i realize now that many bad habits which plague our modern forums are coming from them.
Phrases like "My child don't throw pearls before swine", "God conceals it from the unworthy" are really offensive to all the readers. There is a good reason why Alchemy is regarded as the pseudo-science today, there are no fundaments to build upon because there is no certainty in anything. I mean alchemist of old made such a fuzz about is it our Sal Ammoniac or is it theirs just to make a simple solution!

I am really appalled by the old Masters and their foul language.

P.S.

My honest opinion is that their Sal Ammoniac was mercuric sublimate (HgCl2) which they dissolved in nitric acid and with that horrible poison they dissolved Gold.

Interesting post T.P. Nice to see you chime in.

There is one who worked with mercury on Alchemy Processess. He is ggkavarma. He's currently working with dew. Have you taken a look at his work?
Were/are you personally offended by these those phrases that you've posted?
If so, why if you don't mind my asking?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
T.P.

avatar

Number of posts : 123
Registration date : 2012-08-06

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:29 pm

Yes, i was offended by the low standards the old philosophers had back in the day towards their fellow men.
If that style of obscure writing persistet in the minds of scientist today we would be still living in the Dark Ages. Who needs concealment in science today?
Imagine if somebody wished to build an aeroplane and Aluminium was a secret metal hidden by all the philosophers and the builder needed to go through obscure books in order to discover it and he reads something like: our magical matter is more ductile than copper, more whiter than tin, more fusible than lead and lighter than a feather"!

Thank God those philosophers are thrown at the ash-heap of history!

I will look at ggkavarma work, never heard of him.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
tAlchemist



Number of posts : 50
Registration date : 2017-08-28

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:35 pm

What really does it mean to be worthy? To this day I don't know... I have a hunch though. When you love others, to a certain degree, perhaps this "veil" that some talk about is only lifted then, by the deity known as Abba.

Or maybe to the serious seeker is it then revealed but then...

I've seen people talk about how they've been studying alchemy for 20 years.... they studied longer than I was born but they openly say they haven't made the stone, etc...

Then one guy says, if you've been studying for that many years then something's wrong..

Who's the swine? Swine is an animal. Is swine a metaphor for the unenlightened, still carnal and base?

One person said that we got our own brains, and our own level of comprehension and understanding... not exact those words but I'm along the lines. I'd like to believe this more than a veil being lifted off by an external entity other than ME because I'd then have the reason to believe that I accomplished something through wits and intellect.

Imagine going to a class room with your friends whom you love... but the teacher says Only you cannot enter, for you are unworthy and are one of the swine... I'd be offended for sure.

I felt bad enough secretly, when reading from the bible it says I ain't worthy of love, I'm a sinner, etc

But that is me
Back to top Go down
View user profile
tAlchemist



Number of posts : 50
Registration date : 2017-08-28

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:56 pm

T.P. wrote:
Imagine if somebody wished to build an aeroplane and Aluminium was a secret metal hidden by all the philosophers and the builder needed to go through obscure books in order to discover it and he reads something like: our magical matter is more ductile than copper, more whiter than tin, more fusible than lead and lighter than a feather"!

LMAO! lol!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:51 pm

T.P. wrote:
Yes, i was offended by the low standards the old philosophers had back in the day towards their fellow men.
If that style of obscure writing persistet in the minds of scientist today we would be still living in the Dark Ages. Who needs concealment in science today?
Interesting, do you think that anything has changed today? Hardly!
The phrase is "proprietary information."
Imagine the someone wanted to amass "Greek Fire" and burn down the Parliament Building or Capitol Hill ( not that I'd care); the fire trucks come and unbeknownst to them, they fan the fire with water.

What about a nuclear bomb? Mind you, this info is obtainable, the
materials are a bit more difficult to come by. Imagine every crazed Joe being able to build one.

Or imagine a poison being modified to require a compound antidote that no one but the artificer can manufacture.

Hey, what about the Tesla earthquake machine that could bring down buildings and bridges with simple contrivances if only you possessed the knowledge.
I can imagine a lot of terrible things that could be done with beneficial technologies. Unfortunately, people are required to set these terrible things in motion. But fortunately, not all are so inclined to acquire the requisite knowledge.

T.P wrote:
Imagine if somebody wished to build an aeroplane and Aluminium was a secret metal hidden by all the philosophers and the builder needed to go through obscure books in order to discover it and he reads something like: our magical matter is more ductile than copper, more whiter than tin, more fusible than lead and lighter than a feather"!
I think that the alchemists would have given the secret to boxite using your example above. They seemed more concerned with protecting humanity from itself, than stopping people from taking to the skies.

Seriously though, our first airplanes were used to drop bombs before we realized that we could use them to fly around the world.

As a species, we still lack maturity imho. Obscurity can be equated with "concealed and compartmentalized", Top Secret, Majestic-12, etc, etc.

Plenty of obscurity in secrets still today my friend! And I don't think it's going to end any time soon.

T.P. wrote:
Thank God those philosophers are thrown at the ash-heap of history!
Ya think?

Back to top Go down
View user profile
T.P.

avatar

Number of posts : 123
Registration date : 2012-08-06

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:26 pm

I don't have anything against secrecy if somebody just keeps his silence and don't brag openly about it. Philosophers on the other hand were publishing books, made spectacles out of transmutations calling fellow seekers puffers, swines and so on...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:25 pm

T.P. wrote:
I don't have anything against secrecy if somebody just keeps his silence and don't brag openly about it. Philosophers on the other hand were publishing books, made spectacles out of transmutations calling fellow seekers puffers, swines and so on...

Yeah, but you gotta defend against the naysayers. Times were different in some ways. Metal fraud was prevalent. Life was even less cherished then than now and who would want to be labelled a fraud when you were genuine?
To each their own I always say. I don't think the alchemists would have called the sophists puffers if they didn't puff. Very Happy

All I can say is that I was not/am not offended by those phrases.
I couldn't even begin to take it personally. Everyone just seems too far removed. But that's just me.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
frankjames



Number of posts : 51
Registration date : 2012-10-25

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:24 pm

Perhaps now Chasm369 you will explain in detail your method to do the Great Work.  Have you started and what success have you achieved if any or is it just another false path so far.

We have heard many different ideas put forward by Traveller which need to be tested and verified. I won't dismiss any of his ideas just yet.

You were very again him so now I ask you to fill the vacuum and explain the process clearly and where you think he is wrong. Forget about the Adept thing as that matters little to me, not interested in these things or ego's.

I see you are also against secrecy which is good to hear. I await to hear how you start following the traditional way.

I am not here to take sides but I do feel that once and for all these processes needs to be clarified as so many are leading other completely astray or else dangling carrots that don't have anything to offer if they manage to catch it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
frankjames



Number of posts : 51
Registration date : 2012-10-25

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:27 pm

Perhaps now Chasm369 you will explain in detail your method to do the Great Work.  Have you started and what success have you achieved if any or is it just another false path so far.

We have heard many different ideas put forward by Traveller which need to be tested and verified. I won't dismiss any of his ideas just yet.

You were very again him so now I ask you to fill the vacuum and explain the process clearly.

I see you are also against secrecy which is good to hear. I await to hear how you start following the traditional way.

I am not here to take sides but I do feel that once and for all these processes needs to be clarified as so many are leading other completely astray or else dangling carrots that have anything to offer if they manage to catch it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:55 pm

frankjames wrote:
Perhaps now Chasm369 you will explain in detail your method to do the Great Work.  Have you started and what success have you achieved if any or is it just another false path so far.

FrankJames, Hello and nice to see you chime in.  Very Happy

You ask that I explain in detail my method, and I don't know where it is you've gotten the gumption to ask this of me. If you've read my posts since I've gotten here, you'd clearly see that I'm a stalwart for the arcane way. As such, I will tell you nothing that betrays the history of the ancients.
I can tell you that I started the work back in late 2011 and early 2012. Most if not all of my photos are from that time.
What have I achieved? To be honest, I've achieved putrefaction, separation, inceration, regeneration, and all of the colours that accompany these operations, which is to say, I've manifested the black bituminous matter, the white ammoniacal volatile salt, the dulcified yellow oil, and a regenerated white oleaginous matter. I've seen more. But it is enough to confide this much to you.

Frankjames wrote:
We have heard many different ideas put forward by Traveller which need to be tested and verified. I won't dismiss any of his ideas just yet.

Of course not! Don't leave any stone unturned. Do what you must! Treat every failure as a learning experience. Traveller was full of ideas, some better than the ancients which to me is an epic claim.

Frankjames wrote:
You were very against him so now I ask you to fill the vacuum and explain the process clearly and where you think he is wrong. Forget about the Adept thing as that matters little to me, not interested in these things or ego's.

Yes, I was/am very against his ideas. He read the texts literally which I have already demonstrated. He made assumptions that were far off the mark, making up systems of his own associating the spirit of uriine with carbonates, the spirit of vitriol with sulphates and so on! Where he is wrong is understanding the correct vile starting matter. He is further wrong in understanding that one matter simply means one matter and NO other heterogenous thing.
I don't understand why you ask me to fill any vacuum. Is there a vacuum of knowledge around here? No, I don't think so. But there is a lack of understanding the occult sciences. Those of us who are deficient in this way must enrich themselves with the correct information. To do this, one must search hard and once you've found the information, you must assimilate it to yourself.
I'm not interested in egos either whether it's yours, Travellers, or anyone else. We all have egos, yet we shouldn't allow them to be the face we put before the public. I am confident. If my confidence comes across as egotistical to you, then this is for you to sort out. But I won't diminish my level of confidence on account of the doubts and egos of others as they are not my properties to be concerned with.

Frankjames wrote:
I see you are also against secrecy which is good to hear. I await to hear how you start following the traditional way.

Then you see incorrectly and will wait a long time to hear me outline the clear and valid traditional path. I am all for secrecy. Somehow you've gotten me wrong and if you don't mind, I'd like that you show me the origins of this notion.

Quote :
I am not here to take sides but I do feel that once and for all these processes needs to be clarified as so many are leading other completely astray or else dangling carrots that don't have anything to offer if they manage to catch it.

If someone were to dangle a carrot in front of me and I caught it, I would have a carrot .
Was it not Sendivogious who explained in detail the process of the work to a friend, who then laughed at him and accused him of telling false tales?
Truth surrounds us all in the same quantities yet very few can see these open and clears truths. Whose fault is this? The seeker can only blame himself. Understanding is like the aging of fine wine. It takes time to mature.
Although we all possess an ability to reason, this ability ripens at differing rates in every individual.
So were you to catch a carrot, what would you do? Could you test it? Could you replicate its likeness? Would you allow it to slip from your grasp?
It's better to grow your own carrots once you've learned how, than to rely on someone dangling one in front of you.

Thanks for weighing in Frankjames. What do you think of Glauber since this discussion between traveller and myself?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
frankjames



Number of posts : 51
Registration date : 2012-10-25

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:56 pm

chasm369 wrote:
frankjames wrote:
Perhaps now Chasm369 you will explain in detail your method to do the Great Work.  Have you started and what success have you achieved if any or is it just another false path so far.

FrankJames, Hello and nice to see you chime in.  Very Happy

Chasm369 wrote:
You ask that I explain in detail my method, and I don't know where it is you've gotten the gumption to ask this of me. If you've read my posts since I've gotten here, you'd clearly see that I'm a stalwart for the arcane way. As such, I will tell you nothing that betrays the history of the ancients.
So why you come on this forum. I presume you have read the rules. Would it not have been better to stay on the AlchemyProcceses Forum where you had the same confrontational mannerisms.
Chasam369 wrote:
I can tell you that I started the work back in late 2011 and early 2012. Most if not all of my photos are from that time.
What have I achieved? To be honest, I've achieved putrefaction, separation, inceration, regeneration, and all of the colours that accompany these operations, which is to say, I've manifested the black bituminous matter, the white ammoniacal volatile salt, the dulcified yellow oil, and a regenerated white oleaginous matter. I've seen more. But it is enough to confide this much to you.
Not really as I have done much the same, so what.

Frankjames wrote:
We have heard many different ideas put forward by Traveller which need to be tested and verified. I won't dismiss any of his ideas just yet.

Of course not! Don't leave any stone unturned. Do what you must! Treat every failure as a learning experience. Traveller was full of ideas, some better than the ancients which to me is an epic claim.

Frankjames wrote:
You were very against him so now I ask you to fill the vacuum and explain the process clearly and where you think he is wrong. Forget about the Adept thing as that matters little to me, not interested in these things or ego's.

Chasm369 wrote:
Yes, I was/am very against his ideas. He read the texts literally which I have already demonstrated. He made assumptions that were far off the mark, making up systems of his own associating the spirit of uriine with carbonates, the spirit of vitriol with sulphates and so on! Where he is wrong is understanding the correct vile starting matter. He is further wrong in understanding that one matter simply means one matter and NO other heterogenous thing.

I feel traveller did a phenomenal job on the works of Glauber as you have to bear in mind English is not his native tongue. The word Vile has many meanings in alchemical books but few have ever found what it was. Cycliani, Fulcanelli, Recreations Hermetic and loads of other alchemical books mention this Vile matter so it completely open to interpretation. For some, it's that nasty Uriine. If correct then all Traveller is saying use a similar material you can get in the store and save all that time working with Uriine.  He is entitled to his opinions and we can accept or reject what he says but he is giving many clues such as Oil of Tartar etc. You give nothing. If you are to say he is wrong then you have to prove it or shut up, it's that simple. No point hiding behind the alchemy arcane.

Chasm369 wrote:
I don't understand why you ask me to fill any vacuum.

I guess I was wrong about you even though you said to TP your were open.

Chasm369 wrote:
Is there a vacuum of knowledge around here? No, I don't think so.
Have to ask someone else so as your vacuum is well empty Very Happy


Chasm369 wrote:
But there is a lack of understanding the occult sciences. Those of us who are deficient in this way must enrich themselves with the correct information. To do this, one must search hard and once you've found the information, you must assimilate it to yourself.

So once again I ask you why you are here????

I'm not interested in egos either whether it's yours, Travellers, or anyone else. We all have egos, yet we shouldn't allow them to be the face we put before the public. I am confident. If my confidence comes across as egotistical to you, then this is for you to sort out. But I won't diminish my level of confidence on account of the doubts and egos of others as they are not my properties to be concerned with.

Frankjames wrote:
I see you are also against secrecy which is good to hear. I await to hear how you start following the traditional way.

Chasm369 wrote:
Then you see incorrectly and will wait a long time to hear me outline the clear and valid traditional path. I am all for secrecy. Somehow you've gotten me wrong and if you don't mind, I'd like that you show me the origins of this notion.

No I didn't get you wrong and I believe Alexb also asked you to leave as all your doing is causing hassle and not allowing us to have a meaningful conversation as you keep butting in.I am are not interested in your arcane knowledge

Quote :
I am not here to take sides but I do feel that once and for all these processes needs to be clarified as so many are leading other completely astray or else dangling carrots that don't have anything to offer if they manage to catch it.

Chasm369 wrote:
If someone were to dangle a carrot in front of me and I caught it, I would have a carrot.
Was it not Sendivogious who explained in detail the process of the work to a friend, who then laughed at him and accused him of telling false tales?
Truth surrounds us all in the same quantities yet very few can see these open and clears truths. Whose fault is this? The seeker can only blame himself. Understanding is like the aging of fine wine. It takes time to mature.
Although we all possess an ability to reason, this ability ripens at differing rates in every individual.
So were you to catch a carrot, what would you do? Could you test it? Could you replicate its likeness? Would you allow it to slip from your grasp?
It's better to grow your own carrots once you've learned how, than to rely on someone dangling one in front of you.
Please read what I wrote not what you think I wrote.

Chasm369 wrote:
Thanks for weighing in Frankjames. What do you think of Glauber since this discussion between traveller and myself?

Glauber Salts are great even still bounce

I will soon try out what Traveller is saying and as he said many times all those who worked on this matter gained nothing. He is offering a different solution to an age old alchemical process.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
alexbr



Number of posts : 524
Registration date : 2009-03-26

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:26 pm

frankjames is totally right

obviously I agree with frankjames
on the secret, frankjames is absolutely right

but since I often get mentioned then I reiterate and clarify I my position well here on what I think about chams rules on the secret traveler chams ping pong and very inconvenient statements of traveler and instead very interesting searches of traveler

as I said to chams (which I always respect and admire for its alchemical commitment) this is a forum created and built with rules of open sharing and explicit rules that nik poses and that maybe would now be respected and therefore who is not AGREEMENT WITH THAT I DO NOT SEE WHY YOU REGISTER HERE
but what I have already said and stra said and anyway I repeat it for the umpteenth time

INSTEAD on chans and Schmildvich ETC although not sharing the thought of chams in the secret but also to him chams and Schmildvich etc etc is all my respect for the work and serious commitment that are developing on the alchemical matter dell'uriiiina that I feel like I already said valid no more nor less as many other subjects indicated by the RC in their texts and manuscripts operating thesauro toeltius extasi of federico gualdi etc simply without anything personal and with all the respect for the self-denial that they put in their alchemical work simply here are rules and this rightly rightly says frankjames here cn all the sympathy for their research and experimentation but on keeping the secret here is certainly not their place because keeping the secret here does not respect the rules of this forum rules very different from those of other forums on no to secrecy
very different to the rules of other forums (other forums where instead with them for always dissenting openly on keeping the alchemical secret there is a serious comparison always comparison) here instead if you compare for rules rightly imposed here by nik the comparison must be always open and clear and explicit and without operating secrets otherwise I'm sorry and with all respect and sympathy this is not the forum for them but all this I say with respect sympathy and admiration for anyway their commitment to their serious work and the their serious experimentation that they do in the laboratory but here since they do not want to speak clearly about their operativities here there is no place for them and this battle of breaking down the secret I and mine of the prometeo group carry it openly and explicitly forward always with manuscript publications ancient RC etc and soon everyone will see alchemical scientific popular foundations and only a matter of time now and the old closures secret etc will be totally swept away with peace of mind who does not share and that we say clear and explicit in all open comparisons on sio in other forums and areas.
And you will see very little missing etc
and what we say with a specific plan started with the translation of thesauro thesaurorum and the explicit operation of the rc for always nothing personal with chams and others that are for the secret but simply this is not the place for them but not me more on this issue here because out topic but post on that in another special tread that I'm going to create

however I share and I like location and very interesting research of TP on the various forms of ancient electricity in alchemy and ancient alchemical use of vases of pizoelectric crystals etc all this research area it all very interesting compliment
but it must also be taken into account about the him critic at us are write of the ancient text i agree but we must also understood that in those times there were inquisition and bonfire and the obscure talk was perhaps a must but I will say better in the appropriate tread that I believe

TRAVELER ADEPTO (FOR ME CERTAIN THAT NO !!! UNTIL HE EXPLICITLY SHOWS THEM) BUT ALL ITS RESEARCHES AND HYPOTHES FOR US ARE VERY INTERESTING

but on traveler aside from the serious mistake of saying that he is an adept on which I do not share that I have already expressed him on his research has given an alternative to uriiina with ammonium carbonate and glauber himself in the dialogues he says. .... cite glauber DIALOGUES
A: Pray, Sir, why do you say, Our Salarmoniack? Are their several and different kinds of it? For my part, when I dissolve Gold, I put it into the Aqua Fortis, that [common] Salarmoniack, which is everywhere to be had in the Merchants Warehouses, and is very fit to dissolve Gold into a Yellow water.
and that could well refer to the assumptions indicateci by traveler that I repeat apart from the serious affirmation of self define an adept that minimally do not share however traveler aside what is and remains a serious mistake of ego INVECE FOR ME THE TRAVELLER is for me a very good researcher and it is extremely interesting to hear his alternative operative hypotheses and it would be nice and constructive if leaving aside the reciprocal insults and unnecessary ping pong between chams Schmildvich etc and traveler you could get into the merits of serious operational confrontation which is then the purpose and rules as exactly says frankjames that should be the basis of this different forum on that

from others said I hope that soon traveler responds to continue the serious and profound confrontation and even the right findings on its interesting operating hypotheses and alternatives to the uriiina that has

therefore proposed the word is now up to traveller


...............................................................

frankjames ha totalmente ragione

ovviamente sono d'accordo con frankjames
sul segreto ha totalmente ragione frankjames

ma visto che spesso vengo citato allora IO ribadisco e chiarisco bene io la mia posizione qui su io cosa penso su chams regole sul segreto traveller chams ping pong e dichiarazioni molto sconvenienti di traveller e invece ricerche molto interessanti di traveller

come gia dissi a chams ( che nb sempre rispetto e ammiro per il suo impegno alchemico ) questo è un forum creato e costruito con regole di condivisione aperta ed esplicita regole che nik pose e che magari sarebbe ora venissero rispettate e dunque chi non è d'ACCORDO CON CIO NON VEDO PERCHE SI ISCRIVA QUI
ma cio lo ho gia detto e stra detto e comunque lo ripeto per l'ennesima volta

INVECE su chans e Schmildvich ETC pur non condividendo minimamente il pensiero di chams etc sul segreto ma altresi a lui chams e Schmildvich etc va tutto il mio rispetto per il lavoro e serio impegno che stanno sviluppando sulla materia alchemica dell'uriiiina che ritengo come ho gia detto valida ne piu ne meno come tante altra materie indicate dai RC nei loro testi e manoscritti operativi thesauro toeltius extasi di federico gualdi etc semplicemente senza di nulla di personale e con tutto il rispetto per l'abnegazione che mettono nel loro lavoro alchemico semplicemente qui ci sono delle regole e questo come giustamente dice giustamente frankjames qui cn tutta la simpatia per le loro ricerche e sperimentazioni ma su mantenere il segreto qui certamente non è il loro posto perche il mantenere il segreto qui non rispetta le regole di questo forum regole ben diverse da quelle di altri forum sul no al segreto
ben diverse a regole di altri forum (altri forum dove invece con loro per dissentendo sempre apertamente sul mantenere il segreto alchemico c'è un serio confronto sempre il confronto) qui invece se ci si confronta per regole giustamente imposte qui da nik il confronto deve essere sempre aperto e chiaro e esplicito e senza segreti operativi se no mi spiace e con tutto il rispetto e simpatia questo non è il forum per loro ma tutto questo lo dico con rispetto simpatia e ammirazione per comunque il loro impegno per il loro lavoro serio e la loro seria sperimentazione che fanno in laboratorio ma qui visto che non vogliono parlare chiaro sulle loro operativita qui non p il posto per loro e questa battaglia di abbattimento del segreto io e i mie del gruppo prometeo la portiamo apertamente ed esplicitamente avanti da sempre con pubblicazioni di manoscritti antichi RC etc e presto tutti vedrete fondazioni divulgative scientifico alchemiche e solo questione di tempo ormai e le vecchie chiusure segreto etc verranno totalmente spazzate via con buona pace di chi non condivide e cio noi lo diciamo chiaro ed esplicito in tutti i confronti aperti su sio in altri forum e ambiti .
E vedrete manca molto poco etc
e cio lo affermiamo con un preciso piano inziato con la traduzione del thesauro thesaurorum e l'esplicita operativita dei rc da sempre per cui nulla di personale con chams e altri che sono per il segreto ma semplicemente questo non è il posto per loro ma non mi dilunghero piu su cio qui perche out topic ma postero su cio in altro tread apposito che ora vado a creare

comunque condivido e mi piace posizione e ricerche molto interessanti di TP sulle varie forme di elettricita antiche in alchimia e uso antico alchemico di vasi di cristalli pizoelettrici etc e tutte queste sue ricerche sono veramente molto interessanti complimenti
ma sulla sua critica su come sono scritti i vecchi testi alchemici va pero anche tenuto conto che in quei tempi c'erano inquisizione e roghi e il parlare oscuro forse era d'obbligo ma diro ciò meglio nel tread apposito che creerò

TRAVELLER ADEPTO (PER ME CERTO CHE NO FINO A CHE NON LO DIMOSTRERA ESPLICITAMENTE) MA TUTTE LE SUE RICERCHE E IPOTESI SONO INVECE PER NOI MOLTO INTERESSANTI

ma su traveller a parte l'errore grave di dire che lui è un adepto su cui non condivisione di cio mi sono gia espresso lui sulle sue ricerche ha dato una alternativa all'uriiina con uso di carbonato di ammonio e glauber stesso nei dialoghi dice .....  cite glauber DIALOGUES
A: Pray, Sir, why do you say, Our Salarmoniack? Are their several and different kinds of it? For my part, when I dissolve Gold, I put it into the Aqua Fortis, that [common] Salarmoniack, which is everywhere to be had in the Merchants Warehouses, and is very fit to dissolve Gold into a Yellow water.
..................
e cio potrebbe ben riferirsi alle ipotesi indicateci da traveller che ripeto a parte la grave affermazione di auto definirsi un adepto che minimamente non condivido comunque traveller a parte cio che è e rimane un grave errore di ego INVECE PER ME IL TRAVELLER è per me un ottimo ricercatore e è di estremo interesse sentire le sue ipotesi alternative operative e sarebbe bello e costruttivo se lasciando a parte gli insulti reciprochi e ping pong inutili tra chams Schmildvich etc e traveller si potesse entrare nel merito di in serio confronto operativo che è poi lo scopo e regole come esattamente dice frankjames che dovrebbero essere le basi di questo forum diverso su cio dagli altri

detto tutto cio spero che traveller presto risponda per continuare il serio e profondo confronto e le anche giuste constatazioni sulle sue interessanti ipotesi operative e alternative all'urina che ci ha proposto
dunque ora la parola spetta ora a traveller
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sun Mar 18, 2018 1:35 am

Frankjames wrote:
So why you come on this forum. I presume you have read the rules. Would it not have been better to stay on the AlchemyProcceses Forum where you had the same...

I am here because I chose to come. I read the rules and decided for myself that I wasn't going to adhere to them. You can't say pot is illegal and throw people in jail and then say that it's legal and leave those whose life you've ruined with no remedy.
I could have stayed on the other forum, but I decided to come here and see why you were all signing up at AP.
At least some life has been injected here.

Frankjames wrote:
I feel traveller did a phenomenal job on the works of Glauber as you have to bear in mind English is not his native tongue. The word Vile has many meanings in alchemical books but few have ever found what it was. Cycliani, Fulcanelli, Recreations Hermetic and loads of other alchemical books mention this Vile matter so it completely open to interpretation. For some, it's that nasty Uriine. If correct then all Traveller is saying use a similar material you can get in the store and save all that time working with Uriine. He is entitled to his opinions and we can accept or reject what he says but he is giving many clues such as Oil of Tartar etc. You give nothing. If you are to say he is wrong then you have to prove it or shut up, it's that simple. No point hiding behind the alchemy arcane.
I never once berated his English nor did I see this as a serious handicap.
In fact, I've always maintained that he was very bright, even when he was constantly acting unreasonable.
The word vile doesn't include store bought ammonium carbonate.
Further if correct that uriine is the matter, then traveller should recognize what I've been posting. Perhaps you should as well, that the volatile salt of uriine approaches the nature of Sal Ammoniac and an alkaline and yet is neither of them. This is a specific detail if you're a recipe hunter not looking to waste time. Traveller is entitled to his opinions as is everyone else!
He's not a baby who has to go off crying somewhere. The conversation on Glauber was just getting specific. This was a good thing. But your traveller didn't respond. He was smart enough to see that the specifics were going to refute his theories.
What specifics did he give you of value in regards to oil of tartar? He misses the whole point of it! So do you it seems.
And I don't have to say that he's wrong, read the Dialogues and see for yourself. They say that he's wrong...so you shut up! Razz

Frankjames wrote:
No I didn't get you wrong and I believe Alexb also asked you to leave as all your doing is causing hassle and not allowing us to have a meaningful conversation as you keep butting in.I am are not interested in your arcane knowledge

Listen FJ, your a fly on the wall. You can't be serious about me butting in! I've been asking for others to chime in yet you hesitate. I watch as you visit, but you don't participate. So don't so damned dishonest; it gets my goat.

Frankjames wrote:
I will soon try out what Traveller is saying and as he said many times all those who worked on this matter gained nothing. He is offering a different solution to an age old alchemical process.

It's not a solution. It's an aberration. Do you think traveller knows all those who've worked on uriine? Don't assume like he does that everyone will tell.
What have all the many texts, which are the authority, told you? Nothing!!! and Everything!! Yet what have YOU learned? Oh yes, you've learned to separate your matter, make it black, make it white , and you're crying because of what? You'd think you were doing quite well Very Happy

@ Alexbr,

My friend, you can see that I have respect for you. Your English is far worse than traveller, yet I can understand you well, even where traveller couldn't.
You have an eye for the unusual. You are resourceful. You see potential in the unusual. This is why you gravitated to traveller. In some measure, I find traveller unique as well.
Ok, I challenged him! This is bad? No! I didn't tell him to go away! I wanted to discuss the Dialogues but he is gone on vacation it seems.
This forum is for full disclosure. I understand this! But it's not so easy to speak of this art openly. Not when we think clearly. Of course we will not agree, but we can still share our views.
Sendivogious wished that the value of gold would become nothing so that the secret art could be given to all. He wrote this, but he kept the secret.
I won't attempt to disrespect that. But to share my insights, I will do this with you no problem!
Alexbr wrote:
A: Pray, Sir, why do you say, Our Salarmoniack? Are their several and different kinds of it? For my part, when I dissolve Gold, I put it into the Aqua Fortis, that [common] Salarmoniack, which is everywhere to be had in the Merchants Warehouses, and is very fit to dissolve Gold into a Yellow water.

BUT!!! This solution is always reducible back to the original gold. This solution only makes the particles of gold very small and does not reduce it to a spiritual calx.
This is what B is saying in the next paragraph.
So, as I have said, there is a difference in the way that a specific Sal Ammoniac acts . This alone should be a revelation which justifies what I've said about the salt of uriine approaches Sal Ammoniac and an alkaline but but is neither.
The work is specific for this subtle reason above. Surely we can see this yes?
You can't just use any product...especially when Glauber says that you can't.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Traveller



Male
Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2016-11-12

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 24, 2018 11:28 am

Chasm wrote:
The volatile salt of uriine approaches the nature of Sal Ammoniac and an alkaline and yet is neither of them.

Which words you have read so far in the books of those Chymists, you are simply raving these words regarding your mind made discovery, which words you have already mentioned it bundle of times, so I would like to answer it here, that this discovery of Chymists is neither like volatile Salt of Uriine (ammonium Carbonate), nor like any dregs of Uriine (ammonium Chloride), because these both Salts lies in the composition of your Sal Ammoniac, that’s why they were said that alone it neither approaches the nature of a volatile Salt of Uriine nor to the nature of dregs, because in truth it is one of them. Its composition will be goes in this way, [(NH4)2.CO3.Cl2].

Further I would like to point out here, that when those Chymists tried to replicate the works of the Philosophers, then in those days our modern chemistry was just flourishing so that’s why they didn’t able to provide the right composition of this volatile Salt, which you wrongly calls and gave a name of the Sal Ammoniac of the Philosophers.

If anyone don’t be able to represent his work in the modern scientifical terms then it means you are walking in the darkness, which is not to be said a “Philosophy” but only Ignorance.

I was said that these Chymists like Boerhaave, Russell, Keely, Macquer, Shaw, Fourcroy, they were acted like a bridge to connect us to the books of the philosophers, but actually in truth because of their works of Failure regarding to all the books of the philosophers, they all were also the main cause for deviating the true meanings behind the books of the philosophers, where they have convinced to all the others by their wrong works, that there is nothing special in the books of the Philosophers, as these Chymists have worked on almost everything, like milk, uriine, blood, dew, rainwater, bones, metals, minerals, flesh, wine, salts, vinegar, plants, etc. without attaining the same results as is mentioned in the books of the Philosophers.

According to the alchemical perspective they all were said to be Charlatans or Sophists, who started to replicate the works of the philosophers without having any right foundation about this field of Alchemy, and in result they fully tried to deviate the true meanings of this secret science of Alchemy, where Chasm, Schmeldvich, tAlchemist, like common persons started to believe on their works of failure, and after reading the works of these high practitioners they started to believe that they would have acquired the wisdom. But in truth there is not even a single word of information which helps to understand the truth behind all the books of the Philosophers.

Chasm wrote:
I stand always in defence of our art, ready and willing to refute the claims of sophists who bring ill repute upon our science.

I would like to say here, that Art will always be an Art, it is not any "our Art", or "your Art", because its origins only belongs to "our God", which Art directly connects every word of Holy Scriptures to the Man of Adam, where involves the right strategy, right time, right person, right way, and right, pure, serene things to accomplish the Great Work in a right order, where he will be able to accomplish the results like 1 over 100s of parts of metals into pure Gold, which will only be accounted as a true Art, or else every practicing way out of this will be just simply ARchemy, or only a sophistications for achieving the same things, which cannot be ever take the place of the true Art.

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 24, 2018 3:10 pm

Traveller wrote:
Chasm wrote:
The volatile salt of uriine approaches the nature of Sal Ammoniac and an alkaline and yet is neither of them.

Which words you have read so far in the books of those Chymists, you are simply raving these words regarding your mind made discovery, which words you have already mentioned it bundle of times, so I would like to answer it here, that this discovery of Chymists is neither like volatile Salt of Uriine (ammonium Carbonate), nor like any dregs of Uriine (ammonium Chloride), because these both Salts lies in the composition of your Sal Ammoniac, that’s why they were said that alone it neither approaches the nature of a volatile Salt of Uriine nor to the nature of dregs, because in truth it is one of them. Its composition will be goes in this way, [(NH4)2.CO3.Cl2]

Hello traveller and welcome back. I was beginning to miss you. Very Happy

First of all traveller. What I speak of is not mind made. Let's leave the polemics behind. Let's have a cordial conversation and continue where we left off.
The reason that I must repeat myself is that you accepted that my words were correct, yet you chose to ignore them and carried on with asserting your theory in light of what was presented. Now, we also have the dialogues from which we can examine Glaubers words to his audience.

Further, common sal ammoniac is made from camel uriine. This matter is particular. It is an animal waste water.
Is it not common sense to suppose that this sal ammoniac, so esteemed as a great and efficacious salt, made of camel uriine, that should it not be the sal ammoniac of Glauber, that it may be a uriine from another more unlikely source? It is an animal salt yes?
But as you've read in the Dialogues, the sal ammoniac of the apocothery is not good to entirely reduce gold to where it is no longer gold.

So, from where are you able to deduce your semi reaction equation, not knowing the actual method of how the ammoniacal salt is separated?

Traveller wrote:
Further I would like to point out here, that when those Chymists tried to replicate the works of the Philosophers, then in those days our modern chemistry was just flourishing so that’s why they didn’t able to provide the right composition of this volatile Salt, which you wrongly calls and gave a name of the Sal Ammoniac of the Philosophers.

Ok traveller, so you believe that every analysis of uriine from the past was inadequate. This is your answer?
Can you not accept that there may be a method in preparation of the matter that alters its composition that most chemists and chymists miss?

Traveller wrote:
If anyone don’t be able to represent his work in the modern scientifical terms then it means you are walking in the darkness, which is not to be said a “Philosophy” but only Ignorance.

Modern "scientific terms" are in a constant state of flux. We are constantly sophisticating particles realized and not, of smaller size, giving them names such as muons, mesons, quark, etc, etc.
Is it not easier to accept that all God creations are made of salt , sulfur and mercury?. Is it not simpler to identify our particles as molecular, atomic, and etheric? The nomenclature of the ancients is symbolism. It is simplicity.
This simplicity is easily learnable as opposed to the Lavoisier nomenclature imho.
I can say that your language is difficult to understand, therefore you live in ignorance, but this is untrue as much as your statement is.

Traveller wrote:
I was said that these Chymists like Boerhaave, Russell, Keely, Macquer, Shaw, Fourcroy, they were acted like a bridge to connect us to the books of the philosophers, but actually in truth because of their works of Failure regarding to all the books of the philosophers, they all were also the main cause for deviating the true meanings behind the books of the philosophers, where they have convinced to all the others by their wrong works, that there is nothing special in the books of the Philosophers, as these Chymists have worked on almost everything, like milk, uriine, blood, dew, rainwater, bones, metals, minerals, flesh, wine, salts, vinegar, plants, etc. without attaining the same results as is mentioned in the books of the Philosophers.

Keely was not a chemist, he was a physicist...a pioneer in the field of atomics, analyzed from a different perspective.
Russell was proficient in the 7 arts. He was a great thinker and teacher who saw a simpler more natural organization of matter.

I can't believe that you'd call any of these great men failures. This is your opinion of course and I'm not surprised. Your accusations are also just your opinions and further illustrates that you don't research closely before you speak.
Still, it's good to see you back  cheers

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Traveller



Male
Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2016-11-12

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 24, 2018 3:55 pm

I can understand the way that why you are happy, because JDP has gone.  Rolling Eyes

But no it is really a bad news, I am literally very sad, Crying or Very sad I was just visited the other site for some few seconds and read these informations about him. His passion to illuminate this Art of Alchemy was great, but his informations was not 100% correct, reason I already mentioned here that he was not an accomplished Alchemist, but he is accounted one of the best seekers in this secret lost Art of Chymia, he was a very good reader who has perused all the writings of the Philosophers, so keenly.

Chasm wrote:
I can't believe that you'd call any of these great men failures. This is your opinion of course and I'm not surprised.

The answer about either of any true Physicist, or Biologist, or Doctor, or PHD, I have already put in the last paragraph of my above post, and you have already posted many posts, so in this case you have to wait for my all the answers if you want to start the discussion from the exact place where we had left it.

Your interpretations regarding the works of Glauber, are very funny, it always make me a good laugh.

Chasm wrote:
Take 1/2 ounce of common Gold.
-Put into this, Aqua Fortis made of Vitriol and Saltpeter
-To this add the same weight of Gold of our Sal Ammoniac.

This is to be taken philosophically.

This is the case when one uses a sal ammoniac which does not come from the prima materia.

Glauber evidently has his alchemist hat on right now.
Your philosophic putrefaction will be impossible!!!

Some of you may argue against me and say, "what about the dregs?"

" that all those things that remain yet behind may be perfected..."
What do you suppose is left behind? What do you suppose remains to be perfected?
It is the Fixed salts...the dregs, not to be forsaken!

Here Glauber is only telling in his words about the remaining fixed tincture of Gold, which is left behind, because of not having any true Philosophical Dissolution, as well as not having any true Sal Ammoniac and so no any true Alchemy, many such experiments Glauber also mentioned in his writings, where he is making a Tincture and some part of it is driving out of the Alembic and some part is remaining behind, which is no any Dregs of Uriine. There was only involved the Nitric Acid, Gold and his secret Sal Ammoniac for accomplishing the work which Glauber has mentioned in his short book of Dialogues.

Glauber was not a Philosopher, but according to the perspective of a true Alchemist he was a Charlatan, who didn’t able to replicate even a single method from all the books of the Philosophers, and in the pursuit for a right way of the Philosophers, he was conducted thousands of experiments where he was succeeded for attempting some little transmutations in the field of ARchemy, and this is the only reason that why I was willing to explore his main discovery of making the secret Sal Ammoniac, which will show us a true light in the way of practicing this Minor work of Alchemy.

Which will clear all the confusions, of all the others, who has worked on different things in different ways and able to achieve either nothing or something, because of not having any proper theory or back history of their works, like as everyone will be in knowledge of the works of “Franz Tausend”, who was made some Gold by using his method of Potassium, Iron and Silica,…

Franz Tausend wrote:
The following process was described in the rare book, "Das Goldmacher Franz Tausend": 25.2 gr KOH and silica, were melted in a ceramic crucible by heated on a water bath. A pointed piece of ("male") quartz was used to stir the KOH. After 5 minutes, 1.45 gr Fe2O3 (ferric oxide) were added and mixed until completely dissolved. Then 3.15 gr of silica was added and heating continued until dissolution was complete. The mass was removed from the fire and allowed to cool. After 90 minutes, the crucible was heated to redness. When cooled, the mass had a metallic-mirror surface. When cut in cross-section, a lump of gold was found, weighing 1.9 grams.

In the same way there was another Chymist in the same year, his name was Dunikovski who actually was a Polish Engineer, he was also claimed and once announced in Paris that he had discovered a new kind of radiation which he named "Z rays." He said these rays would transmute sand or quartz into gold. The mineral was ground up, spread on copper plates, and melted by application of 110,000 volts. Then it was irradiated by Dunikovski's Z rays.

Further I will continue to point out the more funny insights from your part,…

Chasm wrote:
What have I achieved? To be honest, I've achieved putrefaction, separation, inceration, regeneration, and all of the colours that accompany these operations, which is to say, I've manifested the black bituminous matter, the white ammoniacal volatile salt, the dulcified yellow oil, and a regenerated white oleaginous matter. I've seen more. But it is enough to confide this much to you.

Everything on earth is made up of the same First Matter, or with the same Prima Materia, where lies the true Universal Spirit. So there are many things on earth that after working on them you can make the same things in a sophisticated way, as are mentioned in the books of the Philosophers, which is like to make the Dye by using any other method which also brings the same color in your work, but is it should to be accounted as Original ? So again question lies the same that did your work brings out the same results as is mentioned in the books of the Philosophers. You or even no one else can give this answer, because they have chosen the way to go out of the subjects of the Philosophers, after leaving their true Prima Materia where lies a Universal Spirit, which always looking to discover only by the hands of an Artist.

Chasm wrote:
I can tell you that I started the work back in late 2011 and early 2012. Most if not all of my photos are from that time.

I knew it that you have done it only one time, that’s why I was asking you that how many times you have done this wrong work, because for bringing the effects of Fulminate of Gold, you have to replicate it many times, before you are willing to guide others to replicate your discovery.

Chasm wrote:
He is making up systems of his own associating the spirit of uriine with carbonates, the spirit of vitriol with sulphates.

When philosophers mentioned the word of “Vitriol”, then it simply means Sulphate of Iron, and when they said “Roman Vitriol” then it means Sulfate of Copper, and when they said “Philosophers Vitriol” then it is said to be their secret matter, which is nothing to do with the other Vitriols. So don’t mix or match these three different matters with the matters you have discovered after working on the wrong subject of Uriine.

I elaborate here, like when I was given a reference of the book of Hollandus to Frankjames, for the multiplication of the medicine, then in this text Hollandus was using the Philosophers Vitriol, where he is driving out a red viscous liquor for the multiplication of his medicine. Which Vitriol should not to be taken literally, so the reader should to keep in mind after perusing the texts of the Philosophers, that which Vitriol he should to use in his work.

Chasm wrote:
He is further wrong in understanding that one matter simply means one matter and NO other heterogenous thing.

I have already cleared here, that One matter or First matter doesn’t mean any one single Element but the One matter or first matter means a compound form of many different elements, which is a quintessence or plasma form of total 7 elements of Chemistry, this is the right interpretation of the term when philosophers said the words of One matter or First matter.

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 24, 2018 6:24 pm

Traveller wrote:
I can understand the way that why you are happy, because JDP has gone.  Rolling Eyes

But no it is really a bad news, I am literally very sad, Crying or Very sad I was just visited the other site for some few seconds and read these informations about him. His passion to illuminate this Art of Alchemy was great, but his informations was not 100% correct, reason I already mentioned here that he was not an accomplished Alchemist, but he is accounted one of the best seekers in this secret lost Art of Chymia, he was a very good reader who has perused all the writings of the Philosophers, so keenly.

I lament his loss as well. I'm sure he will participate on one of these other forums. I don't look at him as an alchemist, but rather a chemist. He is well read; In alchemy, probably more so than most of us.
Still, he was philosophically blind more than anyone, which, after hearing his repetitive rants against ONE MATTER, made him sound like a scholastic idiot in my eyes. He was gifted with an uncanny mnemonic ability and he was certainly unique. He is a peer and as such a healthy rivalry is fine, like what I have with you. Very Happy
I hope to see him one day realize that matter is composed of substance, which is formed of elements. One element is not one matter. This was part of his idiocy in my opinion.

Traveller wrote:
Your interpretations regarding the works of Glauber, are very funny, it always make me a good laugh.

Chasm wrote:
Take 1/2 ounce of common Gold.
-Put into this, Aqua Fortis made of Vitriol and Saltpeter
-To this add the same weight of Gold of our Sal Ammoniac.

Traveller wrote:
Here Glauber is only telling in his words about the remaining fixed tincture of Gold, which is left behind, because of not having any true Philosophical Dissolution, as well as not having any true Sal Ammoniac and so no any true Alchemy, many such experiments Glauber also mentioned in his writings, where he is making a Tincture and some part of it is driving out of the Alembic and some part is remaining behind, which is no any Dregs of Uriine. There was only involved the Nitric Acid, Gold and his secret Sal Ammoniac for accomplishing the work which Glauber has mentioned in his short book of Dialogues.

Dialogues wrote:
B: You speak very well after your own way; And I confess, that every Salarmoniack mixt with Aqua Fortis is very good to dissolve Gold; nor is this any new way, for 'tis in very much use amongst all the Chymists, who are wont on this wise to dissolve their Gold, but yet that which is thus dissolved, still remains Gold, and doth easily admit of being again precipitated out of the Aqua Fortis, and of being reduced by Fusion into the former Body, it had before its Solution. But if so be, that the Solution shall be made by the help of our Sal Armoniack, then is the case vastly altered, and your attempting its Reduction again will be in vain. For if Gold be but dissolved barely once with our Saltarmoniack, it admits not any more of melting, nor doth it of itself return again into a malleable Metallick Body, but gets a Reddish Scarlet kind of Colour in the Tryal [or Crucible] and remains an unfulfil Powder. And if you add some Borax thereunto, and set it in the Fire then to melt, it will pass into a Red Glass, which is a sign of its being plainly destroyed, and of its being transmuted into another Body. And therefore I dare aver, that there is seated in our Salt Armoniack a power of inverting, and transmuting Gold, and of making it fit for the Philosophical putrefaction, which thing is impossible to be done by any other salts whatever they be, and what Name soever called by.

So here it is obvious that Glauber knows of the commons ways of dissolution and he accepts that they are not unknown. He also acknowledges the ineffectiveness of this method.  He tells that common gold dissolved once with the secret Sal Amm is destroyed and is no longer gold.

Traveller wrote:
Glauber was not a Philosopher, but according to the perspective of a true Alchemist he was a Charlatan, who didn’t able to replicate even a single method from all the books of the Philosophers, and in the pursuit for a right way of the Philosophers, he was conducted thousands of experiments where he was succeeded for attempting some little transmutations in the field of ARchemy, and this is the only reason that why I was willing to explore his main discovery of making the secret Sal Ammoniac, which will show us a true light in the way of practicing this Minor work of Alchemy.

Well, what can I say other than that I disagree with your opinion. Glauber was not a charlatan. ARchemy is an abortion.

Traveller wrote:
Which will clear all the confusions, of all the others, who has worked on different things in different ways and able to achieve either nothing or something, because of not having any proper theory or back history of their works, like as everyone will be in knowledge of the works of “Franz Tausend”, who was made some Gold by using his method of Potassium, Iron and Silica,…

Franz Tausend wrote:
The following process was described in the rare book, "Das Goldmacher Franz Tausend": 25.2 gr KOH and silica, were melted in a ceramic crucible by heated on a water bath. A pointed piece of ("male") quartz was used to stir the KOH. After 5 minutes, 1.45 gr Fe2O3 (ferric oxide) were added and mixed until completely dissolved. Then 3.15 gr of silica was added and heating continued until dissolution was complete. The mass was removed from the fire and allowed to cool. After 90 minutes, the crucible was heated to redness. When cooled, the mass had a metallic-mirror surface. When cut in cross-section, a lump of gold was found, weighing 1.9 grams.

Some chemists back in those times didn't realize that gold may have already resided within the silica or perhaps the Quartz stirer.  Very Happy

This is like your answer isn't it? Anyways, I'm aware that gold is made more apparent by other non alchemical  but metallurgic methods.


Traveller wrote:
Further I will continue to point out the more funny insights from your part,…

Chasm wrote:
What have I achieved? To be honest, I've achieved putrefaction, separation, inceration, regeneration, and all of the colours that accompany these operations, which is to say, I've manifested the black bituminous matter, the white ammoniacal volatile salt, the dulcified yellow oil, and a regenerated white oleaginous matter. I've seen more. But it is enough to confide this much to you.

Traveller wrote:
Everything on earth is made up of the same First Matter, or with the same Prima Materia, where lies the true Universal Spirit. So there are many things on earth that after working on them you can make the same things in a sophisticated way, as are mentioned in the books of the Philosophers, which is like to make the Dye by using any other method which also brings the same color in your work, but is it should to be accounted as Original ? So again question lies the same that did your work brings out the same results as is mentioned in the books of the Philosophers. You or even no one else can give this answer, because they have chosen the way to go out of the subjects of the Philosophers, after leaving their true Prima Materia where lies a Universal Spirit, which always looking to discover only by the hands of an Artist.

Very true traveller. So we are back to proofs!

Chasm wrote:
I can tell you that I started the work back in late 2011 and early 2012. Most if not all of my photos are from that time.

Traveller wrote:
I knew it that you have done it only one time, that’s why I was asking you that how many times you have done this wrong work, because for bringing the effects of Fulminate of Gold, you have to replicate it many times, before you are willing to guide others to replicate your discovery.

You're assuming again. And your line of thought is bogus!

Chasm wrote:
He is making up systems of his own associating the spirit of uriine with carbonates, the spirit of vitriol with sulphates.

Traveller wrote:
When philosophers mentioned the word of “Vitriol”, then it simply means Sulphate of Iron, and when they said “Roman Vitriol” then it means Sulfate of Copper, and when they said “Philosophers Vitriol” then it is said to be their secret matter, which is nothing to do with the other Vitriols. So don’t mix or match these three different matters with the matters you have discovered after working on the wrong subject of Uriine.

Traveller, thanks for the lesson on how to read the texts.

Traveller wrote:
I elaborate here, like when I was given a reference of the book of Hollandus to Frankjames, for the multiplication of the medicine, then in this text Hollandus was using the Philosophers Vitriol, where he is driving out a red viscous liquor for the multiplication of his medicine. Which Vitriol should not to be taken literally, so the reader should to keep in mind after perusing the texts of the Philosophers, that which Vitriol he should to use in his work.

Chasm wrote:
He is further wrong in understanding that one matter simply means one matter and NO other heterogenous thing.

Traveller wrote:
I have already cleared here, that One matter or First matter doesn’t mean any one single Element but the One matter or first matter means a compound form of many different elements, which is a quintessence or plasma form of total 7 elements of Chemistry, this is the right interpretation of the term when philosophers said the words of One matter or First matter
.
What they meant generally was either the red earth of Hadama or the mortified, blackened, putrefied leaden body.
They spoke from either of these perspectives generally.

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Traveller



Male
Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2016-11-12

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:38 pm

Chasm wrote:
Some chemists back in those times didn't realize that gold may have already resided within the silica or perhaps the Quartz stirer. This is like your answer isn't it?

No I think you didn’t read the whole theory of his works, regarding his different arrangement of elements, he was a Genius, and there is something special, otherwise why I posted their method and names here. They have actually discovered that how Nature is producing the Gold in Silica. Which is the right answer, but only because of their works of Chemistry they faced some difficulties, which only in the field of Alchemy someone can better modify. So if you can’t admire their discovery, then at least don’t insult these Chemists, I was already in knowledge of your response that’s why I was mentioned two Chemists of the same line, (not the one) i.e. Tausend, and Dunikovski.

Chasm wrote:
They meant generally was either the red earth of Hadama or the mortified, blackened, putrefied leaden body.

But we cannot put the work to an end by only working on this red earth, that’s why Philosophers in all their books was given to their prepared Mercury, the name of their First Matter, where they says that an Alchemist can accomplish the work from the very start to the end by only working on this Mercury, exactly like as you have practiced the way by only using the Uriine. Don’t flatter here, it is not a good thing which goes in your favor, I mean your way to manipulate the whole work is right but your subject is wrong. And I think this is the main cause behind your and my all controversial statements on the forum, so the fact behind all these discussions is only this which I said here.

Here I further elaborate on your wrong insights which you puts here,…

Chasm wrote:
Put into this, Aqua Fortis made of Vitriol and Saltpeter.
Which should to be taken Philosophically.

As I already said that Glauber was not a true Alchemist, first you have to read his whole writings, where he has used many times these Acids, so according to his words here, it simply means common Nitric Acid, now why he used this corrosive liquor, I already said everything here, that because of his dry form of Sal Ammoniac which he was made by following the books of the philosophers, so for its action on Gold he used this corrosive liquor for manipulating his work.

But anyone who would like broaden his way of understanding about the method of Glauber then he never should to lead astray, where there is no need to make any such dry powder, when you know that it is not the real Sal Ammoniac, which is mentioned in the books of the Philosophers. So in case we don’t need to make any of such a dry powder, but after making the Spirit of Uriine (i.e. Spirit of Carbonate), further we should to follow the right order and also should to make the Spirit of Vitriol (i.e. Spirit of Sulfate), and when these both Spirits will mingle together then they will give us a proper Mercury for acting on Gold, so the thing will be in the form of a Liquor (a Spirit) where we don’t need to use any of such corrosive liquor like Nitric Acid, for applying any of wrongly made dry Sal Ammoniac as it was made by Glauber.

Chasm wrote:
Saltpeter is Potassium Nitrate. KNO3. It is used to make fireworks/explosives and to preserve meat. Our mr traveller wants you to believe that only gold is explosive and so leaves you unaware of yet another possibility. There is obviously no gold here.

Potassium Nitrate is used for making gun powder, when it digests in a right quantity with other compounds like Charcoal, Sulfur, etc. But Glauber was telling here only to make the Spirit or Water from this Salt of Potassium Nitrate, in which acid form there will not exist any Potassium which is needed for a right formula of making the gun powder. And after all, above I have cleared that we are not using any of such corrosives. So your supposition that it will lead to any danger is without any basis, but your way of making the Fulminate of Gold, has a proper basis.  Basketball

Chasm wrote:
The making of Glauber's salt involves the use of Sal Ammoniac.

Glauber didn’t use any Sal Ammoniac, I have already answered everything that according to Glauber he was trying to replicate the works of the Philosophers, so in case like all those failed Chymists he also choose the terms of Sal Ammoniac for representing the different stages of his work, he named the “Sal Ammoniac” to the “volatile Salt of Uriine”, and from this volatile Salt of Uriine he was started his works of Minor Alchemy, which then further leads to the method of making his “Secret Sal Ammoniac” by using his Spirit of Uriine (i.e. Spirit of Carbonate) and Sulfuric Acid (i.e. Oil of Vitriol).

Chasm wrote:
The conversation on Glauber was just getting specific. This was a good thing. But your traveller didn't respond. He was smart enough to see that the specifics were going to refute his theories.

You didn’t read the whole volume of Glauber thoroughly, your words are clearly seems to be coming from a person who has just found the book of Dialogues of Glauber and in reply speaking the dialogues for its understanding. You haven’t read the whole more than 3200 pages volume of Glauber, but I read it twice, which thing I was done after understanding all the writings of the Philosophers, which means in reading the words of Glauber I was used my philosophical mind for the purpose of illuminating this Minor way of Alchemy to all the seekers of this Art.

But I am happy that you have just started to understand along with my discussions here, about the short book of Dialogues, where it clearly seems that you are trying to understand the meanings of Glauber, and trying to fit or match your wrong work of those Chymists with the writings of Glauber, about your such behavior I have already mentioned here,…

Traveller wrote:
After your wrong works on a wrong subject, seriously your are now in a very critical condition, where everyone see that if a method is too open, then you changed your mind and try to find its philosophical meanings, too open means too obscure, like when in the preparation of Sal Mirabile Glauber said, in a simple understandable words that “take Kitchen Salt”, then you are trying to deepen your way of understanding and trying to find out its hidden philosophical meanings, even the Glauber is telling this literally, but you are still agree that it is too Philosophical.

So you didn’t read the whole writings of Glauber, in case you can only speculate that what Glauber is talking about in his short book of Dialogues, so who has well read the writings of Glauber, like JDP, and Me, only they better know everything about Glauber, that what he was, and in which class of Alchemy we will put this great Chymist of Netherlands (Bohemia).

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:37 pm

Traveller wrote:
Chasm wrote:
Some chemists back in those times didn't realize that gold may have already resided within the silica or perhaps the Quartz stirer. This is like your answer isn't it?

I was being cute; answering in the same fashion that you do...assuming that these chemists of old were daft.

Traveller wrote:
No I think you didn’t read the whole theory of his works, regarding his different arrangement of elements, he was a Genius, and there is something special, otherwise why I posted their method and names here. They have actually discovered that how Nature is producing the Gold in Silica. Which is the right answer, but only because of their works of Chemistry they faced some difficulties, which only in the field of Alchemy someone can better modify. So if you can’t admire their discovery, then at least don’t insult these Chemists, I was already in knowledge of your response that’s why I was mentioned two Chemists of the same line, (not the one) i.e. Tausend, and Dunikovski.
Traveller, I'm familiar with these methods. The amounts of gold recovered, however, lack lustre. I'm not insulting them. I'm saying that these methods are inefficient. Apparently some of these methods can be scaled up but I'm not aware of any such endeavours.

Chasm wrote:
They meant generally was either the red earth of Hadama or the mortified, blackened, putrefied leaden body.

Traveller wrote:
But we cannot put the work to an end by only working on this red earth,

Says who? Show me one quote that says this!

Traveller wrote:
that’s why Philosophers in all their books was given to their prepared Mercury, the name of their First Matter, where they says that an Alchemist can accomplish the work from the very start to the end by only working on this Mercury, exactly like as you have practiced the way by only using the Uriine. Don’t flatter here, it is not a good thing which goes in your favor, I mean your way to manipulate the whole work is right but your subject is wrong. And I think this is the main cause behind your and my all controversial statements on the forum, so the fact behind all these discussions is only this which I said here.

Ok, so you believe that you know my method which means YOU should understand the texts as I do. Only MY subject is wrong! Nice to have you clarify this traveller cheers

Traveller wrote:
Here I further elaborate on your wrong insights which you puts here,…
Chasm wrote:
Put into this, Aqua Fortis made of Vitriol and Saltpeter.
Which should to be taken Philosophically.

Traveller wrote:
As I already said that Glauber was not a true Alchemist, first you have to read his whole writings, where he has used many times these Acids, so according to his words here, it simply means common Nitric Acid, now why he used this corrosive liquor, I already said everything here, that because of his dry form of Sal Ammoniac which he was made by following the books of the philosophers, so for its action on Gold he used this corrosive liquor for conducting his work.

So he used this dry Sal Ammoniac knowing that it wouldn't work to make gold, non gold or into a red subject. Right? But I just finished showing you in his Dialogues how he was aware that this method was NOT efficacious. The common way used this method and he advised his audience that there was another way using a secret Sal Ammoniac.
I don't know where you think this animal salt comes from, but it is animal. Sorry!

Traveller wrote:
But anyone who would like broaden his way of understanding about the method of Glauber then he never should to lead astray, where there is no need to make any such dry powder, when you know that it is not the real Sal Ammoniac, which is mentioned in the books of the Philosophers. So in case we don’t need to make any of such a dry powder, but after making the Spirit of Uriine (i.e. Spirit of Carbonate), further we should to follow the right order and also should to make the Spirit of Vitriol (i.e. Spirit of Sulfate), and when these both Spirits will mingle together then they will give us a proper Mercury for acting on Gold, so the thing will be in the form of a Liquor (a Spirit) where we don’t need to use any of such corrosive liquor like Nitric Acid, for applying any of wrongly made dry Sal Ammoniac as it was made by Glauber.
You almost sound like you're agreeing with me, except you're making things sound more difficult than necessary. Perhaps because you don't see the work occurring in one vessel???

Chasm wrote:
Saltpeter is Potassium Nitrate. KNO3. It is used to make fireworks/explosives and to preserve meat. Our mr traveller wants you to believe that only gold is explosive and so leaves you unaware of yet another possibility. There is obviously no gold here.

Traveller wrote:
Potassium Nitrate is used for making gun powder, when it digests in a right quantity with other compounds like Charcoal, Sulfur, etc. But Glauber was telling here only to make the Spirit or Water from this Salt of Potassium Nitrate, in which acid form there will not exist any Potassium which is needed for a right formula of making the gun powder. And after all, above I have cleared that we are not using any of such corrosives. So your supposition that it will lead to any danger is without any basis, but your way of making the Fulminate of Gold, has a proper basis.
 
You miss the point of these other works of Glauber. They are an instruction. He is speaking to you in a literal way which is meant to be read esoterically.
I could tell you to make your stone using the method they use to make wine. Would you understand this even though nearly every adept has expressed the same thing?

Chasm wrote:
The making of Glauber's salt involves the use of Sal Ammoniac.

Traveller wrote:
Glauber didn’t use any Sal Ammoniac, I have already answered everything that according to Glauber he was trying to replicate the works of the Philosophers, so in case like all those failed Chymists he also choose the terms of Sal Ammoniac for representing the different stages of his work, he named the “Sal Ammoniac” to the “volatile Salt of Uriine”, and from this volatile Salt of Uriine he was started his works of Minor Alchemy, which then further leads to the method of making his “Secret Sal Ammoniac” by using his Spirit of Uriine (i.e. Spirit of Carbonate) and Sulfuric Acid (i.e. Oil of Vitriol).

So here you have refined your understanding or at least you are revealing to me and perhaps everyone who can understand, that a middle matter is formed in the midst.
You could have said this from the beginning, but you didn't. You were either unaware and didn't know. Or you've recently as I've said, refined your understanding. In either case, you must realize the hopelessness of store bought Sal Ammoniac. If not, then there is still somewhat of a curve to climb.
Chasm wrote:
The conversation on Glauber was just getting specific. This was a good thing. But your traveller didn't respond. He was smart enough to see that the specifics were going to refute his theories.

Traveller wrote:
You didn’t read the whole volume of Glauber thoroughly, your words are clearly seems to be coming from a person who has just found the book of Dialogues of Glauber and in reply speaking the dialogues for its understanding. You haven’t read the whole more than 3200 pages volume of Glauber, but I read it twice, which thing I was done after understanding all the writings of the Philosophers, which means in reading the words of Glauber I was used my philosophical mind for the purpose of illuminating this Minor way of Alchemy to all the seekers of this Art.
lol!  Don't try and make this about me not reading all of his works. Nice tactic. Our discussion worked towards his Dialogues. I posted it because the dialogue shows that Glauber was an accomplished chemist, ie. he became an alchemist. You read it twice, so what? Do you realize and accept that only one salt, no matter what you call it, can accomplish the work as he said?

Traveller wrote:
But I am happy that you have just started to understand along with my discussions here, about the short book of Dialogues, where it clearly seems that you are trying to understand the meanings of Glauber, and trying to fit or match your wrong work of those Chymists with the writings of Glauber, about your such behavior I have already mentioned here,…

Like I said, you're a funny guy. A tacit clown. jocolor

Traveller wrote:
After your wrong works on a wrong subject, seriously your are now in a very critical condition, where everyone see that if a method is too open, then you changed your mind and try to find its philosophical meanings, too open means too obscure, like when in the preparation of Sal Mirabile Glauber said, in a simple understandable words that “take Kitchen Salt”, then you are trying to deepen your way of understanding and trying to find out its hidden philosophical meanings, even the Glauber is telling this literally, but you are still agree that it is too Philosophical.
You still don't understand the nature of sea salt do you?
I will repeat, after philosophical digestion, sea salt remains unchanged regardless of what trials you put it through.
You've mentioned a catalyst before somewhere. The only thing in the works that may answer to being a catalyst is sea salt.

And stop ranting about my wrong subject as if you've finished a trial. You haven't. So you know nothing of DISGUROT.

Traveller wrote:
So you didn’t read the whole writings of Glauber, in case you can only speculate that what Glauber is talking about in his short book of Dialogues, so who has well read the writings of Glauber, like JDP, and Me, only they better know everything about Glauber, that what he was, and in which class of Alchemy we will put this great Chymist of Netherlands (Bohemia)
.
Aaah, it's good to have you back Very Happy . Even if you only acknowledge Glauber to support your views, when his actual open words within the Dialogues, tell the full story.
jocolor
lol!

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Traveller



Male
Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2016-11-12

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:37 am

Chasm wrote:
I was being cute; answering in the same fashion that you do...assuming that these chemists of old were daft.

O buddy, there is a huge difference b/w their whole volume of informations of those Chymists which are written on the basis of their failed works, there is nothing Alchemical. If there is something, then put a quote from their writings, where they able to change a good amount of lead, silver, or iron into Gold.

I was only telling you, that put the names of such Chymists or Physicists, who has left some proof in their writings that now some idiots can follow their books which will be then truly Logical.

This information is not enough to persuade someone to follow their works, that “The volatile salt of uriine approaches the nature of Sal Ammoniac and an alkaline and yet is neither of them”. What does it represent, I have interpreted above.

Chasm wrote:
I'm saying that these methods are inefficient.

Don’ t say like this, they were successfully able to transmute a good part of metal, and Yes, according to the Alchemical perspective apparently some of these methods can be scaled up.

Thanks for giving your opinion here.

Chasm wrote:
Traveller wrote:
But we cannot put the work to an end by only working on this red earth,

Says who? Show me one quote that says this!

This statement about the red Earth is yours, but if you ask me then I can show you many quotes from the books, where philosophers said that by only working on Mercury they can put the work to an end without adding any heterogenous thing in it, which Mercury is called their first matter.

Chasm wrote:
But I just finished showing you in his Dialogues how he was aware that this method was NOT efficacious. The common way used this method and he advised his audience that there was another way using a secret Sal Ammoniac.

Yes in the Dialogues Glauber is only telling us the difference b/w his Sal Ammoniac and the common Sal Ammoniac, and there is nothing which Glauber has shown to us, like the wrong interpretation of the word of Aqua Fortis you made, and matches it with your strong water etc. Don’t try to tell us the things which Glauber didn’t mention, he was only said the word Aqua Fort, which you can simply check into the Alchemical Dictionary that what does it mean.

And again telling you that you don’t need to take these terms too philosophically, because Glauber was not such a high Adept, we are here only talking about a Minor way, or still if you don't understand then prove it that Glauber in his whole more than 3200 pages volume, ever attempted a transmutation like 1 on 100s of parts of metals into Gold or Silver.

So direct or connect your words to tell us only that much, what Glauber has wrote in his words, don’t go beyond, because we are not a true Philosopher and cannot understand your cryptic language. Sorry.  Razz

Chasm wrote:
I don't know where you think this animal salt comes from, but it is animal.

Yes you are right it belongs to animal kingdom, but Glauber also used minerals (Tartar, Lime, Calaminaris) means extraneous things for manipulating his short work of Minor Alchemy, prove it that I am wrong.

Chasm wrote:
Perhaps because you don't see the work occurring in one vessel???

No, you are right, we can’t see, but again you only should to mention the things in your words, how much Glauber is telling us.

Chasm wrote:
He is speaking to you in a literal way which is meant to be read esoterically.

Again, Glauber was not an Adept, so why we take his works esoterically, (o man, I don’t know to who with I am dealing here) can you bring some proof here, that he was an Adept, where he was cured a malignant diseases, or able to successfully transmute 1000s of parts of base metals, like as is written in the books of the Philosophers, then in this case I will start to believe that he was wrote esoterically.

Chasm wrote:
You must realize the hopelessness of store bought Sal Ammoniac.

Okay now as I said that Glauber started his works from the volatile Salt of Uriine, then okay we will extract it from Uriine, at least we have to solve this problem. Or still further if you have a problem, then prove it wrong what I said here, that "Glauber was started his works from the volatile Salt of Uriine which he was extracted from Uriine, through simple distillation”.

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:39 am

Traveller wrote:
Chasm wrote:
I was being cute; answering in the same fashion that you do...assuming that these chemists of old were daft.

O buddy, there is a huge difference b/w their whole volume of informations of those Chymists which are written on the basis of their failed works, there is nothing Alchemical. If there is something, then put a quote from their writings, where they able to change a good amount of lead, silver, or iron into Gold.

Oh stop it! This is exactly what I've told you since our talk at Alchemy Processes and also here. There are other works...specific works! These works should be used as an instruction if you can follow the logic.
Glauber writes of Sal Ammoniac and secret sal ammoniac and then analyzes uriine and highlights the differences. These are all his own words. Yet you want to twist and turn because you want to be an Adept and claim that Glauber wasn't. Then you say Glauber was a genius like no other and his words are canonical.  jocolor

Traveller wrote:
I was only telling you, that put the names of such Chymists or Physicists, who has left some proof in their writings that now some idiots can follow their books which will be then truly Logical.
How many books have you read? How many adepts have you followed?
What have you learned or accomplished from reading them literally other than how certain substances react?
You are a chemist. You see things as a chemist. What if some sage showed up at your and told you that the your schooling in the science of chemistry is weakly founded, what would you do? Show him the door, or think for yourself whether or not he could be right?
You are not all knowing traveller.


Traveller wrote:
This information is not enough to persuade someone to follow their works, that “The volatile salt of uriine approaches the nature of Sal Ammoniac and an alkaline and yet is neither of them”. What does it represent, I have interpreted above.

Ok, you obviously don't see the significance in this which is amusing.
You like to quantify like a typical chemist. Your interpretation, if you wish to call it that, is nonsense! There can be no admission from you that you lack knowledge.

Chasm wrote:
I'm saying that these methods are inefficient.

Traveller wrote:
Don’ t say like this, they were successfully able to transmute a good part of metal, and Yes, according to the Alchemical perspective apparently some of these methods can be scaled up.

I can read and calculate numbers for myself. These methods, if you were to scale up require vast amounts of materials and energy. Don't fool yourself.
There are patents taken out on some of these methods, yet how many companies do you know of that employ these methods? Mind you, some might on a scale secondary to their major mining process, but who knows.

Chasm wrote:
Traveller wrote:
But we cannot put the work to an end by only working on this red earth,

Says who? Show me one quote that says this!

Traveller wrote:
This statement about the red Earth is yours, but if you ask me then I can show you many quotes from the books, where philosophers said that by only working on Mercury they can put the work to an end without adding any heterogenous thing in it, which Mercury is called their first matter.
I made the statement, but I didn't originate it. The red earth of Hadama can be worked to completion without the addition of heterogenous things. You say this is true of Mercury, which is a name that can mean more than one thing. So what are you saying here?

Chasm wrote:
But I just finished showing you in his Dialogues how he was aware that this method was NOT efficacious. The common way used this method and he advised his audience that there was another way using a secret Sal Ammoniac.

Traveller wrote:
Yes in the Dialogues Glauber is only telling us the difference b/w his Sal Ammoniac and the common Sal Ammoniac, and there is nothing which Glauber has shown to us, like the wrong interpretation of the word of Aqua Fortis you made, and matches it with your strong water etc. Don’t try to tell us the things which Glauber didn’t mention, he was only said the word Aqua Fort, which you can simply check into the Alchemical Dictionary that what does it mean.

Glauber also tells you in his Dialogues that common Sal Ammoniac is nothing new and that it doesn't completely dissolve gold. He is quite clear about it. He is very clear in explaining how common Aqua Fort is useless to completely dissolve gold. Yet he affirms that the secret Sal Ammoniac will dissolve gold completely so that it cannot be reduced to its metallic nature again. He is very clear about this. Do you deny his words?

Traveller wrote:
And again telling you that you don’t need to take these terms too philosophically, because Glauber was not such a high Adept, we are here only talking about a Minor way, or still if you don't understand then prove it that Glauber in his whole more than 3200 pages volume, ever attempted a transmutation like 1 on 100s of parts of metals into Gold or Silver.

Of course, because Glauber is a nobody now because it suits you. He was a minor nobody. Now, since you want to use this dim wit tactic, show me where Glauber tells you how to make the minor solvent that completely changes gold into an irreducible red powder? The fact is he doesn't; Not openly as you assert. In fact no text openly does any such thing whether it's by any mind made minor way, or major way.

Traveller wrote:
So direct or connect your words to tell us only that much, what Glauber has wrote in his words, don’t go beyond, because we are not a true Philosopher and cannot understand your cryptic language. Sorry.  

But you can understand Glaubers open language as can thousands of others. And what has come of it other than the "nothing new" reduction of gold using Aqua Fort. What more have you learned from the 3200 pages that you've read twice?

Chasm wrote:
I don't know where you think this animal salt comes from, but it is animal.

Traveller wrote:
Yes you are right it belongs to animal kingdom, but Glauber also used minerals (Tartar, Lime, Calaminaris) means extraneous things for manipulating his short work of Minor Alchemy, prove it that I am wrong.
These are his other works, which I've said to you too many times now, should have been an instruction. But it's clear that you are philosophically blind and don't possess the ability to see beyond the written word. C'est domage! This must be frustrating for you...that ALL of the texts, are written this way. It's okay. Don't despair. JDP was in the same empirical class struggling to define water as two different matters because it is composed of two elements. I can understand how it is that you and he may think in such a quantifying way, but I'm absolutely befuddled by your inability to observe that water...water is ONE particular type of matter.

Chasm wrote:
He is speaking to you in a literal way which is meant to be read esoterically.

Traveller wrote:
Again, Glauber was not an Adept, so why we take his works esoterically, (o man, I don’t know to who with I am dealing here) can you bring some proof here, that he was an Adept, where he was cured a malignant diseases, or able to successfully transmute 1000s of parts of base metals, like as is written in the books of the Philosophers, then in this case I will start to believe that he was wrote esoterically.

Oh here we go with your dim wit proofs again. Because the authorities, who are the authors of ALL the texts, have proven ALL of their claims to you yes? Because you totally and thoroughly understood all of their veiled speech, yes? The truth is mr traveller, that a profound wisdom is required to read esoterically what is written in ALL of these texts. Otherwise, gold today would have no value and none of us would be here on this forum.

Chasm wrote:
You must realize the hopelessness of store bought Sal Ammoniac.

Traveller wrote:
Okay now as I said that Glauber started his works from the volatile Salt of Uriine, then okay we will extract it from Uriine, at least we have to solve this problem. Or still further if you have a problem, then prove it wrong what I said here, that "Glauber was started his works from the volatile Salt of Uriine which he was extracted from Uriine, through simple distillation”.
I don't have to prove anything. You only need to be able to read. Glauber speaks of Sal Ammoniac and its ineffectiveness. He speaks of his secret Sal Ammoniac and its effectiveness.

He analyzes the volatile salt of uriine for all to see. Sal Ammoniac is an animal salt. You find it disgusting but so what! The volatile salt of uriine is animal. Where is store purchased Sal Ammoniac obtained?

We are left to ponder his salt which it pleased him to attribute as being secret. He doesn't tell us anything, we are left to decide for ourselves.

For me it is obvious. Especially when Glauber tells us that, "the work is impossible without this salt, regardless of the name which you chose to give it."
How do you reconcile this?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Traveller



Male
Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2016-11-12

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sun Mar 25, 2018 11:44 am

Chasm wrote:
Then you say Glauber was a genius like no other and his words are canonical.

In discovering the Minor way of Alchemy, he was a genius, that such a thing no any Alchemist ever discover it before, you can see, when I was posted a method from the book “Treatise on Gold”, where Johannes Agricola is also practicing the same way but without making any proper Mercury, where he is also manipulating the same work of Glauber, and giving both of the spirits to Gold, by using the Gypsum and Harts Horn.

Chasm wrote:
How many books have you read? How many adepts have you followed?
What have you learned or accomplished from reading them literally other than how certain substances react? You are a chemist. You see things as a chemist.

The same thing I have asked you many times by taking this subject of Uriine, if I am a Chemist then at least you have a proper understanding of the books of the Adepts, so what you have accomplished by using your Uriine in your work.

But your method of Uriine, is written in this volume of Peter Shaw, he was another wonderful Chymist, after Macquer.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kXogZ4cwT0Lj7rUTlQY2fZxwRJwm8Gwg

Chasm wrote:
Traveller wrote:
This information is not enough to persuade someone to follow their works, that “The volatile salt of uriine approaches the nature of Sal Ammoniac and an alkaline and yet is neither of them”. What does it represent, I have interpreted above.

Ok, you obviously don't see the significance in this which is amusing.
You like to quantify like a typical chemist. Your interpretation, if you wish to call it that, is nonsense! There can be no admission from you that you lack knowledge.

Then you tell me the right composition of your Sal Ammoniac, if it is not like as I told you above.

Chasm wrote:
Traveller wrote:
Don’ t say like this, they were successfully able to transmute a good part of metal, and Yes, according to the Alchemical perspective apparently some of these methods can be scaled up.

I can read and calculate numbers for myself. These methods, if you were to scale up require vast amounts of materials and energy. Don't fool yourself.
There are patents taken out on some of these methods, yet how many companies do you know of that employ these methods? Mind you, some might on a scale secondary to their major mining process, but who knows.

I was talking about my way of making the Tincture of Gold, I don’t know about any other companies that what they are doing in this field, but when I will practice this way then it will work, as I mentioned here the methods of Tausend and Denikovski.

Chasm wrote:
It's clear that you are philosophically blind and don't possess the ability to see beyond the written word. C'est domage! This must be frustrating for you...that ALL of the texts, are written this way.

Here I am showing you my perception to only understand the words of Glauber, but I change my way to understand the words with every other single text where I choose to go in variably different way to get into the mysteries which are hidden behind the words. In more simple words I say to you that its really hard or almost impossible for you to reach to my mind. But I cannot say about your mind, which starts Alchemy from the Toilet, and ends Alchemy on the holy Scriptures.

Chasm wrote:
You only need to be able to read. Glauber speaks of Sal Ammoniac and its ineffectiveness. He speaks of his secret Sal Ammoniac and its effectiveness.

He analyzes the volatile salt of uriine for all to see. Sal Ammoniac is an animal salt. You find it disgusting but so what! The volatile salt of uriine is animal. Where is store purchased Sal Ammoniac obtained?

We are left to ponder his salt which it pleased him to attribute as being secret. He doesn't tell us anything, we are left to decide for ourselves.

For me it is obvious. Especially when Glauber tells us that, "the work is impossible without this salt, regardless of the name which you chose to give it."
How do you reconcile this?

Thanks here for giving your insights in this way, yes you are right his secret Sal Ammoniac is not to be taken as a simple thing, but the problem lies in the starting matter, which Glauber clearly said in his words, that it is volatile Salt of Uriine, and as far as I have understood about your work, then I must say that in this volatile Salt of Uriine, there is something different, that how it changes its nature to become a fusible Salt, but Glauber was gone somewhere more ahead, where he was made a very sharp saline spirit after extracting this volatile Salt from uriine which Uriine he was fermented with the lime, which then he was volatilized it with the help of Salt of Tartar, and then in the end he was used Calaminaris to get such a sharp Spirit, which he was named as Spirit of Uriine.

Now tell me in this method what is here Philosophical and what is literal.

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sun Mar 25, 2018 4:49 pm

Traveller wrote:
Thanks here for giving your insights in this way, yes you are right his secret Sal Ammoniac is not to be taken as a simple thing, but the problem lies in the starting matter, which Glauber clearly said in his words, that it is volatile Salt of Uriine, and as far as I have understood about your work, then I must say that in this volatile Salt of Uriine, there is something different, that how it changes its nature to become a fusible Salt, but Glauber was gone somewhere more ahead, where he was made a very sharp saline spirit after extracting this volatile Salt from uriine which Uriine he was fermented with the lime, which then he was volatilized it with the help of Salt of Tartar, and then in the end he was used Calaminaris to get such a sharp Spirit, which he was named as Spirit of Uriine.

Now tell me in this method what is here Philosophical and what is literal.
Ok, I see what you are looking for. You didn't understand about the salt in the midst did you? I gave you too much credit.
You don't see the ouroboric process do you! lol!
Well mr traveller, what you've described above, Glaubers work, written quite openly, using salt of tartar and calaminaris is a literal work of instruction, to be read esoterically.
I could elaborate on the symbols but I won't. It seems you're  learning and gaining insights but you don't say thanks. You only belittle and ridicule. Go ahead and make your trial with the recipe. You certainly are a recipe hunter. Make the trial and tell me how it works out.  Rolling Eyes
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Traveller



Male
Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2016-11-12

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:14 pm

Chasm wrote:
You don't see the ouroboric process do you!

What ouroborous, again you are matching it with the books of the Philosophers. I have said you many times that this topic is not worth to discuss, so I want to end this discussion, with your philosophical mind here.

Chasm wrote:
What you've described above, Glaubers work, written quite openly, using salt of tartar and calaminaris is a literal work of instruction, to be read esoterically.
I could elaborate on the symbols but I won't.

I was asking you because I wanted to know your mind, but still it is stuck and held with the same process which you have done without having any proper record or back history.

Chasm wrote:
You only belittle and ridicule. Go ahead and make your trial with the recipe. You certainly are a recipe hunter. Make the trial and tell me how it works out.

I will do it, and I am 100% sure that it will work because it belongs to a proper Theory, including the step of multiplying the Tincture, where I again 100% sure that you always seems to be confuse, when it comes to the Multiplication,  Basketball  so can I ask you, that how you do it ? If you don't know the answer then its okay, I can understand it. But regarding the method of Glauber then there will be a control of right temperature, which Glauber was said that it will be high enough, for elevating the Spirit from these minerals.

Regards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
chasm369

avatar

Number of posts : 225
Registration date : 2018-01-10

PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:51 pm

Traveller wrote:
I will do it, and I am 100% sure that it will work because it belongs to a proper Theory, including the step of multiplying the Tincture, where I again 100% sure that you always seems to be confuse, when it comes to the Multiplication, so can I ask you, that how you do it ? If you don't know the answer then its okay, I can understand it. But regarding the method of Glauber then there will be a control of right temperature, which Glauber was said that it will be high enough, for elevating the Spirit from these minerals.

Good!! You will do it, and you will learn something...perhaps a few things.
As for the multiplication, I don't know what you mean, quality, quantity...of base metal to gold or gold to more stone? You need to be more specific. But I'm sure you're just playing with me...right?

Anyways, there's no transmutation unless the subjects are in a state of fusion. If you know the temperatures where this occurs in the subjects that you are using, then you'll have no issue. Otherwise, you're going to learn something very new about heat and philosophical fire, but again I'm giving you too much credit Razz
I'm doubtful that you'll understand the fire anytime soon since you're so hung up on the literal interpretations. But I'm eager to see your trials...100%.
Btw, nice book.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Glauber's "The Salt of Art"   

Back to top Go down
 
Glauber's "The Salt of Art"
Back to top 
Page 22 of 25Go to page : Previous  1 ... 12 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Traveling inside HUGE tree, salt poured on head
» No More Christian Nice Girl!!!
» Lot's Wife Turned to Salt-How Could They Know?

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
The Lost Academy :: Alchemy :: Practical Alchemy-
Jump to: