the_grungler
Harmless
Posts: 11
Registered: 23-6-2025
Member Is Offline
Mood: Spiteful
|
|
dubious nature of a difficult-to-find silica purification process
Hello all,
I'm looking for a way to extract high purity SiO2 from a bunch of sand I have laying around. I found this video by The Canadian Chemist on youtube that looks to do exactly what I want, but something feels off about the process, and I can't quite
put my finger on it. I would much rather follow a published paper or something of similar prestige; it appears there are some minor errors throughout
this video that are addressed, but set me off a little bit. I think it just boils down to the fact that I don't particularly feel comfortable doing
something like this without a reputable source to back me up.
If anyone here can vouch for the process, or suggest a better one, please let me know. Alternatively, if there's a better way to use Google Scholar to
try and find some papers myself than throwing keywords at it and sifting through 15,000 pages of unrelated stuff, that would be just as helpful
Thanks so much!
|
|
|
Fulmen
International Hazard
Posts: 1792
Registered: 24-9-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bored
|
|
I agree with your skepticism, it's unlikely that you'll be able to separate out aluminum oxides this way.
We're not banging rocks together here. We know how to put a man back together.
|
|
|
the_grungler
Harmless
Posts: 11
Registered: 23-6-2025
Member Is Offline
Mood: Spiteful
|
|
Alright, that is sworn off. Looks like he's just making explosives and chlorine gas. I'll try to find a different method.
|
|
|
Radiums Lab
Hazard to Others
Posts: 296
Registered: 18-3-2025
Location: India
Member Is Offline
Mood: Experiencing the elegance of science.
|
|
Amature chemistry channel has a vedio dirt to Si check it. Purity can be tested using HF.
Water is dangerous if you don't know how to handle it, elemental fluorine (F₂) on the other hand is pretty tame if you know what you are doing.
|
|
|
Radiums Lab
Hazard to Others
Posts: 296
Registered: 18-3-2025
Location: India
Member Is Offline
Mood: Experiencing the elegance of science.
|
|
Credits to @unionised for HF method, it works.
Water is dangerous if you don't know how to handle it, elemental fluorine (F₂) on the other hand is pretty tame if you know what you are doing.
|
|
|
Fulmen
International Hazard
Posts: 1792
Registered: 24-9-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bored
|
|
The Amateur Chemistry video uses the same method. I'm sure it removes a lot of contaminates, but he also assumes the sand is basically free from
alumina.
We're not banging rocks together here. We know how to put a man back together.
|
|
|
MrDoctor
Hazard to Others
Posts: 240
Registered: 5-7-2022
Member Is Offline
|
|
Grok, with the right prompts is good at searching for papers, just be mindful that it can only infer so much from the title and abstract, it didnt see
the article itself. It also has the benefit of being able to retrieve references from any language, or at least specified languages, and also patents
too, which lets you find things that would otherwise only be visible if well cited, or, was in a publicly leaked section of something like chemical
abstracts, or some other journal that posts translated abstracts.
Sometimes you can lean on the fact it has a large knowledge-base and encourage it to fabricate something, its fake refference or DOI sometimes is
pretty damn close, and i found a japanese paper that way once on producing a particular sized pore catalyst substrate, since my search was based on
the papers contents not its subject or title.
But you need to generally not encourage faking refferences, and what helps there is not engaging in extended conversation, get answers a limited
number of what you want on the first response or clear and try again, dont make it make a huge list, it runs out of memory and fakes stuff then.
telling it it answered wrong and to exclude things it came up with is a trap many fall into because it rarely presents anything new, 75% of its next
response is built off its last one. a third instructing it to conduct another search because it just repeated a filtered version of its last one,
yields lazier results because, most of its allocated energy is going towards re-using what already been said to keep the conversation consistent.
Thats probably it really, you want an assistant, it wants a chat.
Otherwise, hop on google itself or a better browser that actually honors search advanced search modifiers without ignoring them, and just make a
really big specific search that excludes all the repeating stuff polluting your google scholar results, if you believe that a paper or article exists
describing what you want.
lately ive found google drops the ball so much, outright ignoring must-include or exclude terms.
But practically speaking this is probably what youd want to do, find the right search engine and fiddle with its advanced search parameters, and hope
that what you want has been described in the public domain.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
