• The migration to this new platform is complete, but there are a lot of details to sort out. If you find something that needs to be fixed make a post in this thread. Thank you for your patience!

Aspects of Alchemy

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
I would like to thank JDP, for without his comment...



...I would not have stumbled upon...



...which I have just finished reading from beginning to end.

The greatest alchemical text I have ever read.

Synchronicity in action!

Ghislain

I don't know why, as my comment had nothing to do with such modern misinterpretations of alchemy. You should read my follow-up comment, which will put you back on the right track.
 

True Initiate

Lapidem
Patron of the Arts
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
1,123
I don't know why, as my comment had nothing to do with such modern misinterpretations of alchemy. You should read my follow-up comment, which will put you back on the right track.

:D:confused::D Ha ha ha ha...
 

Ghislain

Thoth
Patron of the Arts
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
2,494
LOOK AT ALL MY GOLD!!!

13938480_1145634308843929_16391457905260855_n.jpg

Scrooge McAlchemist ;););)


Opps! I must apologise, I allowed myself to be dragged into the Facebook style banal retort of an idiot by the posts above.

Ghislain
 

Andro

Alchemical Adept
Magus de Moderatio
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
7,757
Logistical Post

All recent posts dealing with "One Matter Vs Multiple Matters" have been moved to their relevant thread.

Please everyone, let's do our best to keep this topic/debate/discussion on its own relevant thread, to make it easily searchable and so that it's not spread all across the board.

Thanks!
 

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
Thanks again, JDP.

I dig those early texts, from or close to Arabic Alchemy. They somehow feel 'authentic' to me, whereas later authors are more likely to have gone off on a tangent. (But of course, that needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis.)

I think so too. Specially after strange uncorroborated notions like a mysterious and paradoxical "spirit" supposedly pulled from thin air, or "condensing" sunlight or moonlight into supposed liquids/powders, and the like bizarre and outlandish claims became very popular among seekers. The early Latin alchemy was much more like the Graeco-Egyptian, Arabic and Persian ones, concerned with manipulations of actual, real, tangible substances, not hocus-pocus/abracadabra/flimflam claims.

PS: I don't mean that those earlier alchemists were devoid of their own share of fanciful theories and beliefs, just that their practice was grounded on manipulating tangible, real substances, not fictitious notions like pulling a supposed "spirit" out of thin air, or "condensing" moonbeams, and the like fantasies.
 

elixirmixer

Thoth
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
2,871
I just ordered a large "prove JDP wrong" 24"parabolic moonbeam machine. :cool:
 

Michael Sternbach

Occultum
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Messages
684
I think so too. Specially after strange uncorroborated notions like a mysterious and paradoxical "spirit" supposedly pulled from thin air, or "condensing" sunlight or moonlight into supposed liquids/powders, and the like bizarre and outlandish claims became very popular among seekers. The early Latin alchemy was much more like the Graeco-Egyptian, Arabic and Persian ones, concerned with manipulations of actual, real, tangible substances, not hocus-pocus/abracadabra/flimflam claims.

PS: I don't mean that those earlier alchemists were devoid of their own share of fanciful theories and beliefs, just that their practice was grounded on manipulating tangible, real substances, not fictitious notions like pulling a supposed "spirit" out of thin air, or "condensing" moonbeams, and the like fantasies.

Leaving the question of the viability of extracting the SM aside for now, what you refer to as the earlier Alchemists' "own share of fanciful theories and beliefs" appears to be nothing less than the ancient Natural Philosophy with its Platonic, Aristotelian and Hermetic foundations, which provided the theoretical framework for the practical art. Although I readily admit that it can use some updating, I don't see how you could dismiss it in toto and yet believe in the validity of the Great Work and the Philosopher's Stone. They simply can't be explained in terms of contemporary materialistic science.
 

elixirmixer

Thoth
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
2,871
When you finish with your moonbeam capture, you could make a big dobson telescope with it :p

Sounds awesome. I had the best view of saturn last night. I felt as if i could literally see the rings and everything....
 

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
Leaving the question of the viability of extracting the SM aside for now, what you refer to as the earlier Alchemists' "own share of fanciful theories and beliefs" appears to be nothing less than the ancient Natural Philosophy with its Platonic, Aristotelian and Hermetic foundations, which provided the theoretical framework for the practical art. Although I readily admit that it can use some updating, I don't see how you could dismiss it in toto and yet believe in the validity of the Great Work and the Philosopher's Stone. They simply can't be explained in terms of contemporary materialistic science.

Not quite, it is way more likely the other way around: the Stone was discovered accidentally first, through simple & straightforward empiricism, trial & error, like most discoveries of mankind, then a whole bunch of fanciful theories/speculations/conjectures regarding the subject were superimposed on it over the centuries to try to "explain" it. I can very safely discard all this mass of speculation without blinking an eye, just like I do the same about gravity (nobody has ever really been able to explain what it is, yet we know it is a fact simply because we can observe its effects all over the place), for example, and still accept its reality.

As for my interest in the Stone: it is most certainly NOT any of the fanciful theories and beliefs of the alchemists that makes me believe in it. It is the fact that I know that transmutation is quite real, plus the amount of historical witnesses who handled or saw samples of the Stone in action. It takes way more than just theories to make me interested in something. My palate requires more substantial things, it is not satisfied with morsels of empty air.
 

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
When you finish with your moonbeam capture, you could make a big dobson telescope with it :p

And that will most likely be the sole purpose it will ever serve, as the "moonbeam capturing/condensing/materializing" will 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure be a failure :)
 

elixirmixer

Thoth
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
2,871
So tell me JDP...

After I have my super charged moon particles, how would you like me to prove their existance?

Is it enoigh to just send you a sample? Would you like a video of it being made?

I assure you that if i fail i will just happily admit it.... and that ill only be sending powder if it has "sprung" up in distilled water...
 

Michael Sternbach

Occultum
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Messages
684
JDP,

So you acknowledge a 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 % chance of there actually being something to the SM concept???!!! Is that just a temporary glitch or have you mellowed over the years?!

In either case, you just made my day! :D
 

Michael Sternbach

Occultum
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Messages
684
Not quite, it is way more likely the other way around: the Stone was discovered accidentally first, through simple & straightforward empiricism, trial & error, like most discoveries of mankind, then a whole bunch of fanciful theories/speculations/conjectures regarding the subject were superimposed on it over the centuries to try to "explain" it. I can very safely discard all this mass of speculation without blinking an eye, just like I do the same about gravity (nobody has ever really been able to explain what it is, yet we know it is a fact simply because we can observe its effects all over the place), for example, and still accept its reality.

As for my interest in the Stone: it is most certainly NOT any of the fanciful theories and beliefs of the alchemists that makes me believe in it. It is the fact that I know that transmutation is quite real, plus the amount of historical witnesses who handled or saw samples of the Stone in action. It takes way more than just theories to make me interested in something. My palate requires more substantial things, it is not satisfied with morsels of empty air.

How come the Philosopher's Stone transmutes common metals into gold? Why not into platinum, or uranium, or lead? In the classical scheme, this could be explained, as the Stone was the ultimate matter, or matter brought to perfection - and gold was the Solar metal, the Sun representing the highest attainable state. All of which you most likely consider bogus. So what is your explanation for the Stone's action?
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
So tell me JDP...

After I have my super charged moon particles, how would you like me to prove their existance?

Is it enoigh to just send you a sample? Would you like a video of it being made?

I assure you that if i fail i will just happily admit it.... and that ill only be sending powder if it has "sprung" up in distilled water...

As much as you already admit your failures here, I don't think anyone will distrust your word, including JDP (correct me if wrong, JDP), but pictures would help, as well as setup details so we can account for "dusty" peculiarities in the experimental process.

Edit: ooh ooh. And what would be real nice is two setups. One blocked from the moonlight and the other not, for comparisons! ;)
 
Last edited:

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
So tell me JDP...

After I have my super charged moon particles, how would you like me to prove their existance?

Is it enoigh to just send you a sample? Would you like a video of it being made?

I assure you that if i fail i will just happily admit it.... and that ill only be sending powder if it has "sprung" up in distilled water...

How about by accomplishing what you are planning by trying this bizarre "condensing moonbeams" scheme: actually make the Stone with them and send me a sample. THAT I can put to the test!
 

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
How come the Philosopher's Stone transmutes common metals into gold? Why not into platinum, or uranium, or lead? In the classical scheme, this could be explained, as the Stone was the ultimate matter, or matter brought to perfection - and gold was the Solar metal, the Sun representing the highest attainable state. All of which you most likely consider bogus. So what is your explanation for the Stone's action?

Because it is "fermented" with gold or silver. Platinum wasn't known to the ancients. Maybe it is actually possible to transmute base metals into other "noble" metals that were unknown to them. It would be a matter of "fermenting" the Stone with platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc. and seeing if it can also transmute into them.

From my own "chymical" experiments, it seems to me that transmutation is a one-way street: it goes from the more active metals (or "baser" metals, in the parlance of older times) to the more inert metals (or "nobler" metals, in the parlance of older times.) You can make silver (more inert metal) from copper, lead, tin, bismuth, etc. (more active metals), and you can make gold (more inert metal) from silver (less inert metal), but not the other way around. There appears to be some type of "evolutionary" thing going on with metals, if we are permitted to use a biological analogy. It's as if metals seek the more "stable/inert" forms, if forced to radically change by either chymical or alchemical operations.
 

Florius Frammel

Lapidem
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
1,193
Maybe it has also something to do with it's properties. Even modern science makes a difference between the classical Cu, Ag, Au on the one side and Pt,Pd,Os and others on the other side.

From Wiki:
In physics, the definition of a noble metal is most strict. It requires that the d bands of the electronic structure be filled. From this perspective, only copper, silver and gold are noble metals, as all d-like bands are filled and do not cross the Fermi level.[9] However, d-hybridized bands do cross the Fermi level to a small extent. In the case of platinum, two d bands cross the Fermi level, changing its chemical behaviour such that it can function as a catalyst. The difference in reactivity can easily be seen during the preparation of clean metal surfaces in an ultra-high vacuum: surfaces of "physically defined" noble metals (e.g., gold) are easy to clean and keep clean for a long time, while those of platinum or palladium, for example, are covered by carbon monoxide very quickly.
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
How about by accomplishing what you are planning by trying this bizarre "condensing moonbeams" scheme: actually make the Stone with them and send me a sample. THAT I can put to the test!

Personally, if he gets anything at all from his moonbeams I'll be curious/suspicious/impressed. Transmuting moonlight into substance would be enough to get my attention.
 

elixirmixer

Thoth
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
2,871
Personally, if he gets anything at all from his moonbeams I'll be curious/suspicious/impressed. Transmuting moonlight into substance would be enough to get my attention.

You wont be the only one impressed im sure....

Light into matter is pretty spiffy. And perfectly explainable scientifically. Photons interacting with hydrogen oxygen and nitrogen can effect orbital energies that could create the environment for unusual chemical bonding to occur. So while the resulting matter will still just be molecules, there is new energy present. Clearly.

Im thinking of ways that may have effected and contaminated my pervious trial run and i do believe there is potential for the process to have been contaminated so it still could be a dud experiment as JDP suggests. Only time will tell

But basically i am just following what i know to be basic hermetic philosophy.

Spirit ==>Fire==> Air==> Water==> Earth.

We'll see...
 

elixirmixer

Thoth
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
2,871
Hahahahaha another hilarious free gift from AlchemyForums. Cheers JDP. Its great when you can understand the meaning someone implys from a song. Hard to do and great to experience. Thanks again.
 

Michael Sternbach

Occultum
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Messages
684
Because it is "fermented" with gold or silver. Platinum wasn't known to the ancients. Maybe it is actually possible to transmute base metals into other "noble" metals that were unknown to them. It would be a matter of "fermenting" the Stone with platinum, palladium, rhodium, etc. and seeing if it can also transmute into them.

From my own "chymical" experiments, it seems to me that transmutation is a one-way street: it goes from the more active metals (or "baser" metals, in the parlance of older times) to the more inert metals (or "nobler" metals, in the parlance of older times.) You can make silver (more inert metal) from copper, lead, tin, bismuth, etc. (more active metals), and you can make gold (more inert metal) from silver (less inert metal), but not the other way around. There appears to be some type of "evolutionary" thing going on with metals, if we are permitted to use a biological analogy. It's as if metals seek the more "stable/inert" forms, if forced to radically change by either chymical or alchemical operations.

That sounds a lot like one of those "fanciful theories" of the ancients to me! I guess, seeing what they and you saw, you just can't help coming up with such ideas. :D
 

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
That sounds a lot like one of those "fanciful theories" of the ancients to me! I guess, seeing what they and you saw, you just can't help coming up with such ideas. :D

The difference is that they saw it in terms of "perfection" or "nobility", which is a totally arbitrary human concept being imposed on observable phenomena, while I see it in terms of stability/inertness, which is based on empirical facts (base metals are more reactive than so-called noble metals)
 

Michael Sternbach

Occultum
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Messages
684
The difference is that they saw it in terms of "perfection" or "nobility", which is a totally arbitrary human concept being imposed on observable phenomena, while I see it in terms of stability/inertness, which is based on empirical facts (base metals are more reactive than so-called noble metals)

It was an analogy. Just like you have used analogies in the highlighted statements, when you talked about an "evolutionary thing going on with metals" and even suggested they have something akin to a will of their own.

Isn't it remarkable that modern chemistry still talks about "noble metals", not to mention "noble gases"?
 

JDP

Hermes Trismegistus
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,990
It was an analogy. Just like you have used analogies in the highlighted statements, when you talked about an "evolutionary thing going on with metals" and even suggested they have something akin to a will of their own.

So was mine regarding "evolution". I am not suggesting that metals are really "alive" and have a "will".

Isn't it remarkable that modern chemistry still talks about "noble metals", not to mention "noble gases"?

Old habits are hard to break.