The Lost Academy
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

The Lost Academy

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

 

 GW method may be much faster and safer though

Go down 
+8
SonofSol
Kirk
Frank
Zosimo
bonifaesh
kevinpaw123
spagyricus
NDC
12 posters
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
AuthorMessage
Frank

Frank


Male
Number of posts : 83
Registration date : 2010-02-12

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeFri May 28, 2010 7:06 am

Kevin,

it's not necessary to seal the flask.
The temp. are only 104 - 122 °F for the digestion.
My experience with the digestion is that you should
generously use the spirit (probably all the spirit that
was distilled off the phlegma from which you received
the brown stuff) and that it should be digested
longer than 3 days.


Frank
Smile
Back to top Go down
kevinpaw123

kevinpaw123


Male
Number of posts : 217
Age : 60
Location : Garrsion, Minnesota
Registration date : 2009-01-25

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeFri May 28, 2010 8:01 am

Frank,

Thanks. I didn't want to lose spirit. I thought I was being precautionary. I did use all the spirit. I hope sealing it doesn't have an adverse affect.
God bless!
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Sep 20, 2010 9:27 pm

Hi Guys,
Well a busy summer has come to an end and my mind has turned to the laboratory I'd hoped to have built, but when funds get tight it gets hard explaining to the missus, why 'this is more important'!.
That, being said, I turned to my last of Phil. Dew, from Feb/10, and decided I better do something new before the real cold weather arrives. So making the most of what was around and affordable :
the lab
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-6[/img]

This mercury has been covered with only a filter but has had floating crystals removed which were clear and later would not dissolve in water (3 mos). The jar has become quite dark and darker and stinky, yet now is bright red when backlit.
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 E80f5abb[/img]

So I've begun the distillation using copper pipe I had. Would prefer it to be glass but Nick once mentioned fixing the mercury to a metal would not be desirable if using morning dew. And as I not intend this to be for health benefits, this batch, better to accomplish something.

Well... upon saving the first lively spirit which came over, I was somewhat taken aback by it's colour. And this is camera trick, it is the same to the eye.

[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-5[/img]

So what the heck is this... Blue? is it a reaction to the Copper?
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-4[/img]

Presently I am distilling the Phlegm, the temp is low but effective. Hope to have the CM very dry by tommorrow.

Hope you all are well
Peace and Love
Kirk
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Sep 20, 2010 9:33 pm

should say NOT a camera trick.

thx
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Sep 21, 2010 1:00 am

scratch
okay, the phlegm has been removed. Check out this stuff, look at the colour!
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-7[/img]
It appears the same to the naked eye. I don't believe the spirit should have any tint at all except
that of the original mercury. Any thoughts would be welcome.

As for the C.M., it is almost dry but time for sleep and OMG! Does it stink! Like a rotting
corpse, i think! This is the worse I've smelt from these tests

I'll report more on the drying process
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Sep 21, 2010 1:52 pm

Alright, I've dried the gooey material. Have tried not to heat too much but at same time hopefully enough.
As it is my first drying attempt, didn't wish to burn it.
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-8[/img]

Man!!!! Does the stuff stink or what, almost gave me a headache even with a mask. Next time I will use
my vapour mask. It reeks, I can't say that enough times!!!!!! Up to now, I thought oh yea, it's not so bad?

During the drying I continiously stirred using a iron rod, now cooled, the clumps have become brittle.
I hope when crushed, they will be the same inside, confirming the extent of drying.


Still, trying to figure out why my Spirit became blue. It must have something to do with the copper.

Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Sep 21, 2010 3:31 pm

All copper salts are sea-coloured, blue or green. All the ores and all the salts of copper are hydrated, water containing. Nearly all copper salts are highly soluble in water.

COURTSEY OF LEVITY
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Sep 21, 2010 3:58 pm

Maybe it is Blue Vitrol?

Adding aqueous ammonia causes the same precipitate to form. It then dissolves upon adding excess ammonia, to form a deep blue ammonia complex, tetraamminecopper (II).

The layman must be careful upon
The path of wonder where chemists were born

Back to top Go down
Frank

Frank


Male
Number of posts : 83
Registration date : 2010-02-12

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Sep 21, 2010 4:16 pm

Kirk,

I'm afraid your spirit has extracted the tincture from copper. For safety I'd use the spirit from another batch and of course a glass still. Ask Nick maybe a copper tincture is alright but I doubt it.

The drying temp. to completely dry the CM is 1 -1.5 hour at 150°C. Don't forget stirring in between temp. raises.

Good luck!

Frank
Smile


Last edited by Frank on Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Frank

Frank


Male
Number of posts : 83
Registration date : 2010-02-12

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Sep 21, 2010 4:23 pm

BTW

does anyone know where to get a (vacuum) sublimation apparatus cheaply.

I've tried projection with the white stone on lead repeatedly with only negative results. I don't want to use a round flask because the distance and temp. between top and bottom is too short.

Frank
scratch
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Sep 21, 2010 4:31 pm

Hi Frank,
Thanks for the advice, think you are correct. Unless Nick, offers
up an alternative view. I would like to use some more Spirit but only
have Dew/Sea Salt Spirit, left on the shelf. I'm reluctant due to different
PH's (ie: Acidic/Alkaline)

Wondering about next step
Back to top Go down
ramen

ramen


Number of posts : 24
Registration date : 2010-05-17

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeWed Sep 22, 2010 2:45 am

Frank wrote:
does anyone know where to get a (vacuum) sublimation apparatus cheaply.
Frank, for many years, the vacuum pump of choice for the amateur scientist on a tight budget has been the compressor from an old refrigerator or air conditioner. While these systems bottom out at a few tens of torr, it's good enough for many uses. A Google search on "refrigerator compressor vacuum pump" will give you plenty of information about this.

Simple vacuum chambers can be made out of glass jars, mason jars, etc, with a piece of 1/4" copper pipe soldered into a tight-fitting hole that's been punched through the center of the lid. The vacuum purists scoff at such things, but again, setups like that are good enough for many uses. I have been using mason jars and miscellaneous cookware as bell jars for many years. I once saw a table-top fusion reactor demonstrated that was made out of a plastic salad bowl! Basic vacuum systems do not need to be expensive.

I would convert a glass jar vacuum chamber into a vacuum sublimation apparatus by stacking ice cubes on top of the jar's metal lid, which would make the underside of the lid act as the cold finger. A little wall cut from a tin can could be RTV'ed to the top of the lid to keep the ice cubes in place and keep the melt water from running down the outside of the jar.

While this is no where near a "professional" system, it certainly satisfies your requirement of "cheap".

If my description is not clear, let me know, and I will doodle up a drawing for you.

The meal of the discerning gourmet often features...

- ramen
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeWed Sep 22, 2010 10:53 am

Hi Frank,
Take a look at this one, about $300, and simple to use. Very effective.[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-9[/img]
Back to top Go down
Frank

Frank


Male
Number of posts : 83
Registration date : 2010-02-12

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeWed Sep 22, 2010 10:56 am

Hi Kirk,

you posted while I was writing this. Yeah looks cool: I will check it out.

Original message: You are right Kirk, don't use spirit from dew/rain/or snow for the GW work. I'd distill more GW spirit from another batch of putrified GW.

Don't give up. We'll get there.

Frank
Cool
Back to top Go down
Frank

Frank


Male
Number of posts : 83
Registration date : 2010-02-12

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeWed Sep 22, 2010 11:46 am

Hi Ramen,

thanks Ramen for the help and detailed advice.

Don't forget that we deal here with quantities of crystals of 2-10 Grams. If you sublimate the crystals, they would probably condense on the metal lid. Then would probably occur the same that happened to Kirk's copper. The now sublimated mass is more corrosive (the more subtle it is the more penetrating) and it attacks it even more. So metal is out of the question.

I need a device with a glass cold finger, that sticks rather far into the glas container and is easily pulled out in order to be stripped off the crystals by a spatula. The vacuum is of secondary importance because some substances can be sublimed by normal pressure others need a gross vacuum of ca. 10hPa and some a fine vacuum of < 0.1 hPa.

Frank
scratch
Back to top Go down
Thanatos

Thanatos


Number of posts : 22
Age : 36
Location : Sol of Diego
Registration date : 2010-08-09

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeWed Sep 22, 2010 9:28 pm

Dear Frank,

I believe I can intuit that which you are after, namely, said volatitle salt, aka that which sublimates into a very clear and pure crystalline matrix. John French mentions that this was Hollandus's famed cure for gout.... I might be wrong, from what I can gather this is true, if my memory serves me.

If I am correct and you seek this volatile salt, which, with my limited investigation of these sacred alchemical texts, might be called nitre (?, confirmation anyone?) I suggest searching Chyropsee's posts, as there is an image which contains a glass flask with a male joint, such that you can utilize two flasks and with a very gentle heat, sublimate this salt. Some difficulty might ensue unless you manipulate a unique tool bent at 155* or so that you can easily and delicately chisel the crystalline matrix off the inside glass surface.

I have in fact requested a special order from a vendor on ebay, who I will follow up with shortly; the order was placed about a month ago and should be due any time now. The 24/40 ground glass erther (dunno spelling) flask with a male joint was priced at about $20 per flask.

To anyone who is interested, Let me know and I can provide you with the ebay seller, or possibly even ask him a reduced price for a dozen or more if there are enough of us who would like to utilize them as well. I like to keep at the very least one back up flask, but now that I am being acquainted with the sacred ways of Fire I am somewhat less apt to crack a flask =P.

Godspeed,

-In Love and Light
Back to top Go down
Frank

Frank


Male
Number of posts : 83
Registration date : 2010-02-12

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeThu Sep 23, 2010 7:15 am

Thanks Thanatos,

I'm not necessarily after a volatile salt. I'm only trying to clean and exalt the crystals which are not subtle enough to do the transmutation.

A good vacuum sublimation apparatus would be:
http://www.laborglas-shop.com/index.php?seite=shop&shop_unterseite=artikeldetail&navi_kat=2&navi_shop=&artgr_nr=295&artikel_id=1142063

Frank Smile
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeThu Oct 14, 2010 9:22 am

Hi everyone,
Rainy days have arrived here in Canada, as the fall sets in. It has been almost a year since I began to try practical beyond theory. There have been many setbacks but the accumulated practice really has been rewarding. It would be great to have more time and space.


Anyhow, upon creating Copper Sulphate by mistake, has left me with no Spirit to put back upon the CM. I wonder if one could distill the water from the Sulphate solution but it has been tinged already beyond use?

The CM was not fully dried, so I decided to finish it yesterday. Using my plate outside, thinking the smell would not be much but HOLY SMOKES!
It still smelt outrageously crazy, even around the house. Our friend came over just and upon opening the door... 'what is that smell???'

Back to the subject...
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-13[/img]

I heated it at 150 C, for 1.5 hrs (thanks Frank), all the while quietly smoking away.
Q: what do we think the smoke is from? the element?
It's finished [img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-10[/img]

Took a mortar and ground it all up
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Photo-11[/img]

Looks pretty good, must prepare for the next step.
Currently have new brew frementing awaiting puterfaction.


study
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSat Oct 16, 2010 3:29 pm

Hi Frank,

I've been thinking about the Vacuum, and wondering how you would use it and for which step. Could it be used to clean an Oil? I've used the posted Vacuum at work for prepping rubber moulds in order to take all the air bubbles out before pouring.




It is a very small door in this world one needs to find

study
Back to top Go down
NDC
Admin



Male
Number of posts : 599
Age : 43
Location : beyond the veil
Registration date : 2008-12-26

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 09, 2010 1:53 am

Kirk, why do you believe it's copper sulfate? You said you added ammonia to it, so it would be an ammonia copper salt, not a sulphate. Where did the sulfur come from?
Back to top Go down
http://alchemy-illuminated.com
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 09, 2010 11:13 pm

Nick, I was wrong in calling it Copper Sulfate, I didn't know better as the solution happened by mistake. I searched for internet answers and became mistaken. Thanks for clearing that up, as it is the ammonia copper salt. I'm wondering what I might do with it? The work is a great adventure.

thanks for the advice

Back to top Go down
kevinpaw123

kevinpaw123


Male
Number of posts : 217
Age : 60
Location : Garrsion, Minnesota
Registration date : 2009-01-25

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jan 03, 2011 10:30 pm

Hey everyone!

It has been quite some time since I've been able to post anything. Sparing many of the details, my wife and I moved this last year. Picking up where I left off. Due to our move the GW has digested for several months. I ended up with about 400ml of spirit. There was about 125ml of our substance when I saw formations on the surface and I also noticed what seemed to be crystals forming around the bottom of the flask. The crystals almost look black but when enough light is used they do have a deep orange/red coloration. I don't know if it was a good Idea or not but I filtered the liquid from the chunks. I kept the chunks and dried using a double boil method. There was slightly over 100ml of the remaining fluid which I also double boiled till I saw an unquestionable skin form on the surface. I then placed it in the fridge to form more crystals. Hear are the photos. Enjoy
[img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW55[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW32[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW36[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW40[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW42[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW44[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW45[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW46[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW48[/img][img]GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 GW53[/img]
Back to top Go down
Kirk

Kirk


Male
Number of posts : 248
Age : 64
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2010-03-10

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Jan 04, 2011 9:10 am

hey Kevin,
you start the New Year, with great photos and the all familiar
black gooey stuff. Nice work! great shot of the 'skin'. hopefully
you get some good crystals from fridge.

it seems everyone slowed down or disappeared. maybe all have
been quietly working methods out. Personally, I've been working
on digesting and cleansing what I believe are salts. Still enjoying
the unknown - much to continue learning.

may the year bear fruit to all
Back to top Go down
kevinpaw123

kevinpaw123


Male
Number of posts : 217
Age : 60
Location : Garrsion, Minnesota
Registration date : 2009-01-25

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeWed Jan 05, 2011 11:47 am

Hey guys

I need to purify both the spirit and the crystals. I saw earlier that wilfried said he used a filter in the neck of the flask ( his looked so clear )...what kind of filter? to make or buy?
someones help would be greatly appreciated.
Back to top Go down
kevinpaw123

kevinpaw123


Male
Number of posts : 217
Age : 60
Location : Garrsion, Minnesota
Registration date : 2009-01-25

GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitimeThu Jan 06, 2011 10:45 am

I feel abit silly as the answer has revealed itself Rolling Eyes
For all it's little challenges. Love the work!
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content





GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: GW method may be much faster and safer though   GW method may be much faster and safer though - Page 3 Icon_minitime

Back to top Go down
 
GW method may be much faster and safer though
Back to top 
Page 3 of 4Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Similar topics
-
» GW1 Method
» wet method or dry method?
» thanks for this method
» GW Method 3
» GW Method Warning

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