Sciencemadness Discussion Board - On the subject of ORMUS

On the subject of ORMUS

Pages: 1 2

stygian - 26-10-2005 at 11:49

Some of you may or may not have any idea what im talking about. The basic idea is elements or compounds with no metallic bonding. I feel this subject is somewhat borderline but it seems to be (to me) worth looking into. Some of the chemistry is beyond my understanding so I want to hear what some of the more versed of our members think.

The process states that repeatedly digesting gold with aqua regia and HCl breaks the gold into clusters of 2 atoms, in the chloride form, what i mean is that the AuCl3 is actually Au2Cl6 (only a single metallic bond between 2 atoms, no bigger of a cluster). Then:

(6) Sodium chloride is added in an amount whereby the sodium is present at a ratio 20 moles sodium per mole of gold. The solution is then diluted with deionized water to a volume of 400 ml. The presence of the aqueous sodium chloride provides the salt Na2Au2Cl8.
(This makes sense. AuCl3 + HCl gives HAuCl4, so NaCl should give NaAuCl4 (or, considering the metallic bond, Na2Au2Cl8))

The presence of water is essential to break apart the diatoms of gold.
(Ok? The patent says the sodium does the breaking apart. Or does it just assist?)

(7) The aqueous sodium chloride solution is very gently boiled to a just dry salt, and thereafter the salts were taken up alternatively in 200 ml deionized water and 300 ml 6M hydrochloric acid until no further change in color is evidenced. The 6M hydrochloric acid is used in the last treatment.
(It says water is necessary to break the metallica bond, but this step says to boil to dryness? What role would the water and HCl play?)

(8) After the last treatment with 6M hydrochloric acid, and subsequent boildown, the just dry salt is diluted with 400 ml deionized water to provide a monoatomic gold salt solution of NaAuCl2'XH2O. The pH is approximately 1.0.
(So is what we have here essentially NaCl + Au(I)Cl?)

Nowhere on the internet have I found the chemistry of the explained in a way I can understand, such as. "Once this is added, it forms such-n-such, which upon boiling with HCl, does this, etc etc."

Another supposed method of producing these 'monoatomic' elements involves fusing e.g. copper powder with lye (which i intend to try soon). Once dissolved in water, if the copper has indeed reacted should be evident, what compounds might be formed, some kind of sodium copper hydroxide?

Continuing on with the gold process:

(9) The pH is adjusted very slowly with dilute sodium hydroxide solution, while constantly stirring, until the pH of the solution remains constant at 7.0 for a period of more than twelve hours. This adjustment may take several days. Care must be taken not to exceed pH 7.0 during the neutralization.

(If you're just neutralizing the HCl you just added, is there a point to adding it anyway? My chemistry knowledge is limited here)

(10) After the pH is stabilized at pH 7.0, the solution is gently boiled down to 10 ml and 10 ml concentrated nitric acid is added to provide a sodium-gold nitrate. As is apparent, the nitrate is an oxidizer and removes the chloride. The product obtained should be white crystals. If a black or brown precipitate forms, this is an indication that there is still Na2Au2Cl8 present. If present, it is then necessary to restart the process at step (1).

(Is there a reason sodiumgold nitrate is better than sodium chloride? Or is THIS what breaks the gold-gold bond?)

(11) If white crystals are obtained, the solution is boiled to obtain just dry crystals. It is important not to overheat, i.e., bake.

(I assume this means, "If the last step was successful, this is what you do now"

(12) 5 ml concentrated nitric acid are added to the crystals and again boiled to where the solution goes to just dry. Again it is essential not to overheat or bake. Steps (11) and (12) provide a complete conversion of the product to a sodium-gold nitrate. No chlorides are present.

(Again, is this just switching nitrate for chloride, or is there some function to this?)

(13) 10 ml deionized water are added and again boiled to just dry salts. This step is repeated once. This step eliminates any excess nitric acid which may be present.

(I can believe this.)

(14) Thereafter, the just dry material is diluted to 80 ml with deionized water. The solution will have a pH of approximately 1. This step causes the nitrate to dissociate to obtain NaAu in water with a small amount of HNO3 remaining .

(Would this really happen? Maybe nitric acid is easily removed from these compounds whereas hydrochloric is not?)

(15) The pH is adjusted very slowly with dilute sodium hydroxide to 7.0 + 0.2. This will eliminate all free acid, leaving only NaAu in water.

(Makes sense)

(16) The NaAu hydrolyzes with the water and dissociates to form HAu. The product will be a white precipitate in water. The Au atoms have water at the surface which creates a voluminous cotton-like product.

(This sounds believable to me. But like I said my knowledge of chemistry is limited.)

Afterwards you 'anneal' the HAu in inert atmosphere to remove the proton and form the supposed monoatomic element.

Here is, what seems to be, a legitimate study done on these materials. Results were "Inconclusive". The materials they obtained showed some of the properties (mostly, the reaction to magnets) but they werent able to obtain yields or qualities claimed in the patent: http://www.geocities.com/spfaile/Ormus.html

Bafflement w/bullshit

Hermes_Trismegistus - 27-10-2005 at 10:18

It is a well known phenomena that if you throw enough multi-syllabic, scientific sounding crap at someone they usually will shut up and listen, not wanting to look stupid.

The facts are that Dave Hudson is a fraud, a con-man, snake oil salesman, charlatan....etc.etc.

He fleeces the ignorant, in their ignorance, and is not even particularly original about it.

He describes a series of relatively simple chemical reactions and describes some things that are supposed to happen during them..

Reality is...he is just combing existing words in new ways and making no sense at all..

pseudo-scientifi-babble...

Unfortunately it is really difficult to educate the public about these parasites that prey on the real health fears of the general public.

People really want to beleive that there is a magic powder that will slow their aging and cure all their aches and pains.

Unfortunately, proper diet, good excercise and realistic health expectations and an accceptance that the aging process is a natural part of life does not seem to be catching on...

So these bastards make money selling worthless crap to the frightened and the sick and the desperate.

:mad:

My dear old dad always says that it's a good idea to look at the messenger before accepting the message.

I agree. Everything I have found on Dave Hudson indicates that he is a high-school dropout dirt farmer failure from the boondocks of arizona. How much "cutting edge science" are you going to beleive has been done by a man that couldn't pass a grade 11 physics exam?

I also think it's a form of justice that this greasy prick who has been trying to get rich off the sick has now had something like six bypass surgeries and still has ongoing heart problems.

What's the matter DAVE Hudson? Maybe you should stop going to those medical clinics and try taking some of that ORMUS powder yourself Eh, you fucking snake!!! :cool:

Unfortunately there is always another scammer waiting to pick up where he left off, there are now several companies selling that snake oil.

There will always be more "ionized bracelet, copper wristband, magnetic shoe implant" selling weasels trying to screw your gullible grandmother out of her social security money! :mad:

Blind Angel - 27-10-2005 at 13:43

Might be a bit of thread highjacking, but I hear the real deionized water is very hard to get since pure water is such a good solvent that it suck CO2 out the air and make HCO3, I also found out that distilled water has an actual pH of ~4.0 (the one bough in pharmacy and other place like that), i'm I righ or simply fooled?

12AX7 - 27-10-2005 at 14:01

::blink::

...Anyway...

So Hermes, only got 24 negative lines to say about the person? Nothing concrete and scientific? At all? Ok, so...

Tim

Blind Angel - 27-10-2005 at 20:14

Well googling for Dave Hudson yield a bunch of alchemy website (including the RangeGuide) as everyone know Alchemy (even though being the honored ancestor of chemistry) is a pseudoscience, like astrology (revered ancestor of astronomy), that start bad.

Now googling for Ormes/Ormus doesn't give any better result: cold fusion, philosopher stone, life elixir.... hmm.... one also talk about using you chakra to see atoms and start to analyse the structure according to this... re-hmm...

Pubmed yield nothing on Ormes/Ormus, monoatomic gold give one resulf on nanotech gold wire. So it doesn't look good sorry, I'm on Hermes side on that, it's pseudoscience.

Well I guess..

stygian - 28-10-2005 at 07:30

Well, at one time my response would have been the same (Philosopher's stone? what malarky!) And even though I didn't ask for anyones opinion on spirituality, they gave their opinions on it so I will say that I've had experiences to make me believe, or at least be more open minded to it.

Surely amongst you geniuses there is somebody that can answer the very simple questions I've asked? Such as "NaOH + Cu -(melt)-> ?" Or "Does/could repeatedly boiling a solution of sodium tetrachloroaurate cause any sort of a change?"

vulture - 28-10-2005 at 08:16

Quote:

(14) Thereafter, the just dry material is diluted to 80 ml with deionized water. The solution will have a pH of approximately 1. This step causes the nitrate to dissociate to obtain NaAu in water with a small amount of HNO3 remaining .

(Would this really happen? Maybe nitric acid is easily removed from these compounds whereas hydrochloric is not?)

(15) The pH is adjusted very slowly with dilute sodium hydroxide to 7.0 + 0.2. This will eliminate all free acid, leaving only NaAu in water.

(Makes sense)

(16) The NaAu hydrolyzes with the water and dissociates to form HAu.

This doesn't make sense. At a pH of 1 it is a basic salt and then at a pH of 7.0 it hydrolizes to the acid?

stygian - 28-10-2005 at 08:54

SOme thoughts:

edit: was thinkin of a different part
Step 14: Maybe HNO3 is present as a sort of complex (similar to AuCl3.HCl) that does dissociate with H2O.

I don't really see why he used nitric acid though. I think the salt could possibly be reduced ala CuSO4 = ascorbic acid, though maybe with a stronger reducing agent.

Where does it say that the sodium-gold nitrate is a basic salt?

Now on my other question, about fusing NaOH with Cu. In the "preparation of platinum salts" thread, KOH/KNO3 fusion is mentioned. What is the product of these fusions?

[Edited on 28-10-2005 by stygian]

resonance - 28-10-2005 at 16:53

well ive made the stuff from "karom" brand himalayan rock salt...

its basically separating the salt away from the minerals and other supposed m-state material,

have taken a few doses, and noticed light changes, and definate electric hemispheric balancing...

i hear of someone who makes it from gold, and you get much more from your money, and it is better but you need a method, and there is none that work online...

great for astral travellers and meditators, or just to try something different, i didnt anneal mine, people says tis not necessary others say it is...

12AX7 - 29-10-2005 at 02:51

Platinium* group metals typically have high oxidation states, anionic in nature (i.e., platinate, rhenate, osmiate, etc., comparable to chromate, tungstate, etc.). A hot, oxidizing, basic environment will certainly get the metals there. I don't know what oxidation state(s) are produced from a melt.

A fusion with Cu probably won't do anything because Cu doesn't go above +2, although it does form the unstable cuprate there. To get some ideas you might look up Brauer on potassium cuprate (II).

*Note the spelling. My little dig at the aluminium crowd

Tim

[Edited on 10-29-2005 by 12AX7]

Vlad - 1-2-2009 at 07:42

Picture 1

triangular white precipitate 1.jpg - 8kB

Vlad - 1-2-2009 at 07:43

Picture 2

triangular white precipitate 2.jpg - 8kB

Vlad - 1-2-2009 at 07:44

Picture 3

triangular white precipitate 3.jpg - 7kB

Vlad - 1-2-2009 at 07:48

The three pictures in the previous posts are of an ORMUS precipitate.

What I did was extract from volcanic sand, and while waiting for the precipitate to settle I went away, and when I came back an hour or two later I saw that triangular shape had formed from the ormus precipitate part and appeared on top of the layer of silica precipitate.
It's pretty amazing imo, I've never seen anything like it. How could it spontaneously form like that? I didn't fake the photos and I didn't 'arrange' the precipitate by mechanical means (pretty impossible anyway since it's so fluffy even moving the beaker in front of the webcam made it lift up).

Vlad - 1-2-2009 at 07:57

Quote:

Surely amongst you geniuses there is somebody that can answer the very simple questions I've asked? Such as "NaOH + Cu -(melt)-> ?" Or "Does/could repeatedly boiling a solution of sodium tetrachloroaurate cause any sort of a change?"

From all I've researched and read, the ormus precipitate as per the method I made it, was by the man who taught the method called m-state, and he claims it's a sodium bound form. He claims there is no such thing as monoatoms, only sodium bound forms of monoatoms (apparently) of platina group metals. This is m-state. This man claims he observed for monoatomic gold one gold atom and three sodium atoms under an electron microscope. The bondings I do not know about and I have seen discussion that it's imposibble for something like Na3Au to exist, so it's probably something like a clathrate, maybe a sodium hydroxide hydrated form of a monoatom, or a monatomic hydroxide of a monoatom maybe with the sodium present for another role?
The same man also claimed David Hudson's material was in the same form. According to the patent, David Hudson claims he goes from NaAu to HAu and then anneals the hydrogen off to leave a pure monoatom.

I can state that using said man's methods, I made an interesting precipitate and noticed another interesting effect so it seems to work to produce interesting material.
When dried the preciptiate looks like a white powder. At least when made from pure gold. When extracted from volcanic sand and dried it's more off-white greyish.

chemoleo - 1-2-2009 at 08:40

Could you say what you actually did, how you prepared it?

I found this http://www.quantumbalancing.com/make_ormus.htm

What is all this about???

Vlad - 1-2-2009 at 09:28

It's amazingly easy. What matters is the source material. And one of the very best if not the very best is volcanic sand. I used magnetic black volcanic sand from Hawaii. I think it contains gold (but it's illegal to collect the sand btw).

(I don't have a lab and did this in my kitchen btw without expensive equipment like a funnel.)

I took the sand and put it in aqua regia first. This step is unnecessary for extracting 'ormus' but I performed it on this batch that showed the shape so it might have mattered although I don't know-understand how it could have. I used a standard 1 part HNO3 3 parts HCl mix I think.
(I then ether extracted this and used the extract which I why I wanted to put it in aqua regia)

Then I dried the sand and made a strong NaOH solution (several spoonfulls per liter) in a stainless steel pot and boiled for a few hours. Depending on how much potential 'ormus' your source material contains, this can be a very short time boiling (half an hour) up to a long time. Usually I boil two hours. When all the sodium hydroxide is 'used up' for reacting with the sand to form potential ormus, the pot will 'bang'. It's not dangerous but if it happens you'll notice it. That's the sign to stop boiling.

Then after cooling (the next day I think) I filtered the solution through a cotton towel. The sand can sometimes (usually) be used a few times.

Then I lowered the pH with phosphoric acid (80 something%). Vinegar can also be used and so can HCl.
(I think the use of phosphoric acid may have mattered perhaps for/in the formation of the triangular shape)

When I approached neutral pH, a chunky white precipitate started to form and drop, along with very fine fluffy white precipitate, the ormus precipitate.

Then I let the solution stand for the mixed precipitates to settle and when I came back to check if the precipitates had settled I saw the shape on the lower layer.

Now what is interesting about it is that this precipitate probably did not contain monoatomic gold or ormus gold, because I put the sand in aqua regia first and I think most gold forms would have dissolved in the aqua regia. Rhodium and iridium and maybe platina present would not have dissolved in the cold aqua regia and maybe be the probable major components of the ormus precipitate.

If you want to try this yourself, here is how I would have continued after the mixed precipitates had settled after filtering.

Decant the solution and 'wash' twice by adding distilled water, mixing up the precipitate, and let it settle again.

Then add some HCl, just enough to acidify and a bit more. The solution should turn faint yellowish-green.
The ormus precipitate dissolves, the dirty one doesn't. It's mostly silica sodium reaction products that don't dissolve in HCl.

Decant the solution and save it. Add distilled water to the remaining precipitate, mix up, and decant and save again until you feel you have everything. I don't remember if I used to filter through a towel instead of decanting to leave the unimportant precipitate behind, but this could also work though could cause contamination from the towel.

Then take the yellow greenish solution and adjust the pH near neutral with a NaOH solution or just by adding sodium bicarbonate powder (fast and easy). The white fluffy precipitate drops again near pH 7. Then let it settle and wash with distilled water three times or more if you want all the salt out.

That's the ormus precipitate that can according to said man who taught the basic of this method can be ingested for health benefits and is probably the same or close to the same powder that David Hudson had.

[Edited on 1-2-2009 by Vlad]

unionised - 1-2-2009 at 13:31

Looks like a complicated way of making dirty silica gel then extracting a few metals from it.
When SiO2 is first precipitated it is very disorganised- a random array of SiO bonds with water in. As the precipitate ages ( and reorganises itself) I guess it shrinks a bit. That would explaine the "curled up at the edges like an old sandwich" look of the stuff.
Extracting it with acid and getting a yellow/ green solution looks lo me as if you have found iron. Presumably it was trapped in a silicate lattice before so it couldn't be extracted by the aqua regia.
There will be other stuff there too, zinc, aluminium, titanium etc. These will ppt when you neutralise the solution with bicarbonate.
There doesn't seem to be anything here apart from fairly ordinary chemisrty.
I think Hermes was right.
Was it worth resurecting this thread for?

JohnWW - 1-2-2009 at 13:42

Quote:

Originally posted by 12AX7A fusion with Cu probably won't do anything because Cu doesn't go above +2, although it does form the unstable cuprate there. To get some ideas you might look up Brauer on potassium cuprate (II).

Wrong- Cu(III) and (IV) are known, at least as fluorides and oxy-anions, although they are very strongly oxidizing.

chemrox - 1-2-2009 at 16:18

I don't understand why the claim of elements with no metalic bonding is considered in any way novel. I do avoid all sites connected with yahoo. You might read about wetter water there too and will definitely pick up some spam.

Vlad - 2-2-2009 at 03:08

Quote:

When SiO2 is first precipitated it is very disorganised- a random array of SiO bonds with water in. As the precipitate ages ( and reorganises itself) I guess it shrinks a bit. That would explaine the "curled up at the edges like an old sandwich" look of the stuff.

I haven't been able to reproduce the triangular shape though. It's a fairly unique occurence as far as I noticed.

Vlad - 2-2-2009 at 03:37

What I actually ment is that I find it improbable that the triangular shape is a result of SiO since it can't be reproduced.

Quote:

Extracting it with acid and getting a yellow/ green solution looks lo me as if you have found iron.

Or monoatomic gold, since if you start with pure gold metal you also end up with a grass green gold chloride solution instead of a yellow gold chloride solution.

Could be iron, just could also be monoatomic gold. I noticed the yellow-green color before if gold is dissolved in HCl with H2O2 added.

[Edited on 2-2-2009 by Vlad]

Sauron - 2-2-2009 at 04:02

Hermes T. was right. This bullshit.

File this one next Red Mercury and the imaginary isotopes under D for Detritus.

Really this has nothing to do with amateur science.

[Edited on 2-2-2009 by Sauron]

not_important - 2-2-2009 at 04:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad
It's amazingly easy. What matters is the source material. And one of the very best if not the very best is volcanic sand. I used magnetic black volcanic sand from Hawaii.
(snip)

Eroded basalts. Iron, titanium, manganese, barium, strontium, vanadium, chromium, tungsten, molybdenum, arsenic; all those will react with and extract into hot strong alkali, some calcium will come along for the ride as well. Gold and any of the PGE in basalts typical are found in sub-ppb quantities, even with some concentration in the sands they're not likely be be of significant proportion.

I don't understand why you think any of the noble metals would dissolve in hot alkaline solution, given that they are used for vessels for concentrating solutions of NaOH and KOH, and fusing the solid hydroxides.

Out of the elements present in basalts, Fe, Mn, Cr, and V will all give compounds in the yellow-green range.

Vlad - 2-2-2009 at 07:54

Quote:

I don't understand why you think any of the noble metals would dissolve in hot alkaline solution, given that they are used for vessels for concentrating solutions of NaOH and KOH, and fusing the solid hydroxides.

The hot alkaline solution extracts the supposed monoatomic forms present in the source material. The monoatomics are supposed to be non-metallic in that state and have other characteristics. I don't understand the exact science beyond it either, but I noticed that shape appeared and to me that's peculiar and worth checking out.

Vlad - 2-2-2009 at 08:02

In David Hudson's patent, the boiling down with salt supposedly serves to tie sodium to the gold.
People skip this step and make monoatomic gold (including commercially) by burning gold metal with sodium metal and then boiling it in sodium hydroxide and precipitating it out.

I never tried above method, but I managed to make monoatomic gold from pure gold another similar way, and when freshly precipitated, a field could be felt emanating or around the beaker with the precipitate in it. I felt it and a sceptic friend who was there. It felt like a magnetic field without push or pull. There is definitely something about this substance imo. I never felt a magnetic field from a beaker with precipitate before.

Sauron - 2-2-2009 at 08:33

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZNext stop: antigravity.

Bullshit!

Sedit - 2-2-2009 at 10:01

Bullshit you say? Where is your proof? For a man of your supposed caliber this synthesis should pose no problem to attempt one afternoon and report back on where his patent is bullshit.

Is there anyone that could possibly pull up and legitimate patent on this subject?

I have looked and found many places like here and they all seem to run the same patent over and over yet search results on real patent searches pulled up nothing.
http://www.rexresearch.com/ormes/ormes.htm

I am willing to try this , albeit alot skeptical of it because after all it is a patent and a sketchy on at that, If someone is capable of pulling up a real patent and not just some hearsay propaganda from the internet then its a go.

The original if indead is real makes no claims of healing property or anything of supernatural origin. All it states is that he found a way to shift the electrons from one orbital to another which sometimes shows superconducting properties.
One thing I find funny is that all the sites that talk about healing propertys ect use the term ORMUS as to not , from what one site specificly said, patent infringe. The real term for this is ORMEs

I would love to see what he is getting and possibly confusing as something else.
Unlike some people I prefer to try things Im skeptical about instead of calling bullshit on something I dont understand and have never done.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
random video about ormes. semi scientific
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2129165010048711403

[Edited on 2-2-2009 by Sedit]

unionised - 2-2-2009 at 10:29

Sedit,
It was bollocks 3 years ago and it's bollocks now.
If you had gold as a monatomic material- say a really fine colloid, it would dissolve very rapidly in aqua regia. Certainly coloidal gold dissolves faster than the bulk metal so as single atoms the reaction would be faster still.
So, any monatomic gold (if it ever existed) would be dissolved at the first stage.

As for "I have looked and found many places like here and they all seem to run the same patent over and over yet search results on real patent searches pulled up nothing.", doesn't that tell you something?

Sedit - 2-2-2009 at 10:38

Tells me about everything and im on the same page as every one else in thinking this is BS.

But I also chose not to rule out anything I have no personal experiance with either and was woundering if someones patent searching skills where better then mine.

The thing that gets me is he calls them monoatomic gold yet stated that they are large clusters of gold atoms bonded thru a nonmetalic bond similar to BECs, to me this is a contridiction in itself.
I feel this man may have produced something but due to his lack of information was unable to understand what he had. Hence I would love to attempt it just to see what gets formed. The synthesis dont seem complicated just a little involved so worse case senario is I wasted an afternoon playing with chemicals

watson.fawkes - 2-2-2009 at 10:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad
What I did was extract from volcanic sand, and while waiting for the precipitate to settle I went away, and when I came back an hour or two later I saw that triangular shape had formed from the ormus precipitate part and appeared on top of the layer of silica precipitate.

The triangle shape, to my eye, looks exactly like something related to seed-crystal growth. It looks like your precipitate started (randomly, I'll presume) in this case at the bottom edge of the beaker. Growing along the planes of equal mass-action, you get something that is, mathematically, identical to optical wave propagation in a non-homogeneous medium. The boundaries between the glass and the precipitate have slightly higher mass action from the local geometry, so you get a hyperbolic surface (=local negative curvature) as it crawls along the surface of the glass a little faster than it grows forward along its surface.

There's a second process going on that gives rise to the triangle. It seems like its driven by a solubility difference, where the coloring material comes out of solution later. In any case, that triangle shape is indicative of one of the higher-order singularities, whose cross section is exactly a triangle with a caustic point at each vertex. This, again, has a direct analogy to optics, and admits an analysis of relating some kind of mass-action difference to propagation speed.

Sedit - 2-2-2009 at 11:22

Found it here.
http://inventors.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ/Ya...

Kinda interesting dont ya think that this guy lives in Phoenix AZ and yet he took out the patent in the UK, sounds a little fishy to me.

Sauron - 2-2-2009 at 19:10

This entire thread is an insult to everything that this forum is supposed to stand for.

Sedit - 2-2-2009 at 19:27

Then perform scientific method and discredit it. Thats the way the scientific methods work isn't it?
I must be wrong because it seems as though many think that it is based on opinion and assumptions.

I think the guy is either mislead or an out right fraud but never the lest if every one thought like you Sauron the world would still be flat and the center of the universe.

Close mindedness has no place in science when someone puts out a repeatable proceedure which this man has, and where his logic is obviously flawed, saying that he didnt obtain some sort of material with unusual properties without trying it first hand it like a virgin trying to tell me about the joys of sex.

Sauron - 2-2-2009 at 22:54

The word is "misled"

No one needs to waste their time on this obvious chicanery. No one needs to dignify such ludicrous malarky by engaging in debunking it. If it looks like shit and smells like shit and has flies buzzing around it, I suggest you don't put your foot in it. Do you need to analyze a pile of manure to ascertain that it is crap? NO.

Monoatomic gold. Why don't we discuss engrams and orgone boxes, hold a seance and consult the shade of L.Ron Hubbard? The Scientologists claim to be scientific, too. Ask John Travolta. Ask Tom Cruise. Or better yet - leave them to their delusions.

Sedit - 2-2-2009 at 23:39

"Do you need to analyze a pile of manure to ascertain that it is crap"

How many of our medicines and fertilizer where obtained from careful analysis of that crap? Do you see where Im getting here?

Without careful debunking two things happen,
One we end up with what happend here and now thousands of people are possibly being swindled out of there money due to the fact that almost no one in a position to do so steped up and said "look we attempted every methode disscussed and quite frankly this is bullshit".

And two we miss the metaphoric 'gold' that is hidden deaply in that pile of shit that we are analyzing.

To get an idea of how someone should proceed here before speaking go here, http://www.rexresearch.com/ormes/ormeprep.htm

And scroll all the way down to the experiments by James Mann, He being as what i percieve as a believer is under the impression that he fucked up some how because at step 10 (what ever that maybe I havent been able to verify WTF step 10 is yet) he always obtained a black precipitate. After many boils in nitric acid solutions I wouldnt doubt that what he was obtaining was a gold oxide precipitate which sounds quite normal after the conditions that they are putting them thru.

The next example also seems prone to failure and they cant even find there gold for that matter,

These two debunkings are how it should be done because word of mouth and what someone believes is what lead to this being carryed on for over a decade now to begin with.
Word of mouth proves nothing, only carefully carryed out repeatable experiments proves things.

When I first read this almost 10 years ago I knew very little about chemistry and this seemed very plausible. I was under the assumption that he would take a metalic salt and neutralize it until PH was as even as could be, I have had it in the back of my mind ever since just to have it awakend when I opened this threed which caused me to looks a little deaper.

My question would have to be aside from the whole idea of what this guy is trying to accomplish.

What would be produces if say, A solution of copper chloride was very slowly and preciesly neutralized with NaOH to afford NaCl, would the Copper hydroxide form or would some equalibriam set up here?

[Edited on 3-2-2009 by Sedit]

Sauron - 3-2-2009 at 02:07

The wise man picks his fights and does not fritter away his time and energies on trivialities like this.

not_important - 3-2-2009 at 02:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Sedit
Then perform scientific method and discredit it. Thats the way the scientific methods work isn't it?
I must be wrong because it seems as though many think that it is based on opinion and assumptions.

It could be said it is already disproved, based on decades and even centuries of research and theory on the chemistry of gold and the platinum metals.

This ORMUS does not fit within establish chemistry, established by the scientific method. Proponents of ORMUS are the ones who must present sufficient evidence to call into question the established theories.

They state that there is a new form of existence for these atoms, one where normal valance electrons do not act in their typical fashion. The atoms do not bond to themselves, are not detectable by wet chemistry or by optical emission spectroscopy; all of which involve electrons with energies of a few eV. They also are not detectable by XRF, involving K and L shell electrons and energies in the KeV range, for the heavy elements of ORMUS in the 10s of KeV; and apparently not by mass spec as done for isotope determination for geological research.

Yet these atoms form chlorides and hydroxides, meaning there are valence shell interactions. The explanation given often involves hyperdistorted nuclei, energy levels orders of magnitude higher than XRF and not noted for long term stability and dumping their energy as gamma radiation. No explanation is given as to why these atoms do not have some sort of vis-UV emission spectra from these chemically interacting electrons.

Given that a number of elements were discovered by optical emission spectroscopy, it is very odd that they were not discovered in the last 150 years by UV-Vis methods. It is even odder that

Quote:

David Hudson, a present-day alchemist who "re-discovered" Ormus in basalt rock in the Arizona desert, indicates that as much as 5% of the dry matter weight of our nervous system could be Ormus elements

Soils which are considered rich in these elements might contain up to six percent of this material.

Yet conventional wet chemical analysis has failed to notice this 5% missing mass. Once again several elements were discovered when chemical analysis of minerals failed to give percentage totals near 100%, differences caused by unknown elements acting chemically like known ones or not being caught in the existing procedures.

This reminds me of alchemical experiments with repeated evaporations or distillations to obtain some product, where the product might have nothing to do with the starting materials but was the result of leaching from containers or matter falling into the containers.

For those experiments to be more meaningful, blanks should have be run; both using just the reagents but no gold or mineral, and reagents plus pure silica or silicates related to the bulk of the minerals.

Also missing is actual hard data from the instrumental analysis performed. The appearance of statements similar to "The lab prefers to remain anonymous" is somewhat off putting. There is no reason why a sample could not have been taken to a commercial or university lab and been analysed 'blind' and those results published with the lab information.

Note that for many of those processes given the starting material is a complex mixture of compounds. A number of hydroxides tend to strongly absorb various ions on their surface, unless properly treated confusion will result further on in the analysis. Download a few inorganic analysis books from the Internet Archive, ones that include the rarer elements, and read through them and note the places where special care is needed.

Sauron - 3-2-2009 at 03:58

Worth chucking out is more like it.

It;s all blather intended to fool the gullible and ignorant.

It's utter nonsense.

Sedit - 3-2-2009 at 08:47

How do you know?
Considering the tone and lack of any useful information as to what is wrong with it I would assume that you have never even looked into in in the slightest bit.

Sauron - 3-2-2009 at 09:25

If I want to visit a fantasy world I'll go see LORD OF THE RINGS.

When I do science I do science not bunkum.

ORMUS is bunkum. Its discussion does not belong on this forum except perhaps in Whimsy.

unionised - 3-2-2009 at 10:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Sedit
How do you know?
Considering the tone and lack of any useful information as to what is wrong with it I would assume that you have never even looked into in in the slightest bit.

Didn't you read this bit?
"Given that a number of elements were discovered by optical emission spectroscopy, it is very odd that they were not discovered in the last 150 years by UV-Vis methods. It is even odder that

Quote:
David Hudson, a present-day alchemist who "re-discovered" Ormus in basalt rock in the Arizona desert, indicates that as much as 5% of the dry matter weight of our nervous system could be Ormus elements

Soils which are considered rich in these elements might contain up to six percent of this material.

Yet conventional wet chemical analysis has failed to notice this 5% missing mass. Once again several elements were discovered when chemical analysis of minerals failed to give percentage totals near 100%, differences caused by unknown elements acting chemically like known ones or not being caught in the existing procedures."

The missing 5% isn't missing so there's clearly something wrong with the idea that 5% of the nervous system or 6% of a rock might be something unknown.

Sedit - 3-2-2009 at 18:00

Quote:

If I want to visit a fantasy world I'll go see LORD OF THE RINGS.

When I do science I do science not bunkum.

ORMUS is bunkum. Its discussion does not belong on this forum except perhaps in Whimsy.

Reading your post is such a waste of my time yet I still seem to put my self through it for some reason.

ORMUS is no doubt in my mind bunk and David Hudson is no doubt a charletin trying to make money from his failing crop land due to poor soil by trying to claim that it has the rarest substance in the world in it.

This is of no concern to me what I was getting at is science always likes to call Bullshit if it dont understand something, you have shown a compleate lack of knowlage on the subject and only carry on a conversation on opinion instead of information. Unionised stated opinion and information, your post here are more along the lines of trolling.

Quote:

Its discussion does not belong on this forum except perhaps in Whimsy.

So you think its better to bury false information under a rock instead of publicly making it known to be false? Obviously there are more uninformed out there that will not understand that this is bunk like I was when I first read it years ago.

It is a general disscussion of a chemical synthesis that is public knowlage. Although it may be a false synthesis the disscussion of why it is still holds merit just as any threed that you have written in this forum.So one hearing about ORMUS for the first time and using TFSE will now be able to save them selfs time and effort.

~Sedit

not_important - 3-2-2009 at 18:43

Another part of this that makes little sense

Quote:

The gold must be properly dissolved to as small a particle size as possible
...
Each flask contains two litres of aqua regia with 500 mg of gold.
...
After one month on the stirrer, the contents of the flask are reduced to a dry salt as per step 1, fresh aqua regia added, and placed on the stirrer for another month.

This is a slight excess of aqua regia to dissolve a half gram of gold. That aqua regia is not a stable mixture, but rather decomposes with standing, seems to be overlooked as well.

It seems that they believe that dissolving gold in aqua regia does not easily produce HAuCl4, but instead results in particulate or clustered gold, and that additional processing must be done to get "monoatomic gold" Never mind that studies have been done on the structure of HAuCl4 and related compounds (it is present in solution as a dimer Au2Cl6 with the gold atoms connected through a double bridge of halide atoms.); ignore that gold clusters and nano particles have been extensively studied for years.

BTW - they also ignore decades of experience of analytic chemistry in regards to working with gold, in particular that care must be taken to avoid loses due to the reduction of gold to a fine colloidal state that does not settle out and passes through filter paper and most fritted filters.

Sauron - 4-2-2009 at 02:37

Don't waste your breath. The true believers will just curse you for a heretic and continue in their unreason.

hissingnoise - 4-2-2009 at 04:54

Amen!
I see Sauron, your bullshit detector is fully-functional and up-to-date.
I can skip this thread. . .
(Online again after a long outage)

Vlad - 4-2-2009 at 06:33

So if I get it right, the white precipitate you get from burning gold metal with sodium metal and then boiling in a NaOH solution and precipitating out, is a metallic gold nanoparticle or ordinary hydroxide or something?

Professional chemists have made this substance in a lab and made sure that there is no contamination from the crucible or reagents, so it's almost certainly a gold-sodium reaction product.

To hissingnoise:

Sauron - 4-2-2009 at 06:34

Yes, it's a recent pro model and I keep the firmware updated.

[Edited on 4-2-2009 by Sauron]

Sedit - 4-2-2009 at 17:48

Vlad I would like to see a refrence for the substance he pofessional chemist have made. Im assuming your not talking of Ormes because the only accounts that I have found where professionals have conducted hudsons patents ended up with nothing more then a black precipatate.

If you look around there are plenty of papers describing the production of gold nano particals which is about the only thing that is even remotely monoatomic gold.
~Sedit

Vlad - 5-2-2009 at 03:07

I have no reference. I know this from a mailing list I was/am subscribed onto and where chemists are subscribed on too as well, and some of them made the grass green goldchloride solution Hudson refers to as being a monoatomic chloride and subsequently precipitated a white fluffy flocculant/precipitate from it that when dried and annealed is said to be gold orme. So obviously the boiling down steps in the patent to reach a green solution do work.

DrP - 5-2-2009 at 03:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Sauron
This entire thread is an insult to everything that this forum is supposed to stand for.

Quite an amusing read though. Catch this bit from the BS site that was posted:

QUOTE:
"10. Since Ormus is strongly affected by intent and by energy fields, it seems to increase its potency if you surround it with high-energy objects. These range from crystals, to photos of beloved teachers or grandmothers, to written intentions of goals, etc. "

Ha ha ha..! Perhaps Vlad's crytals will get bigger if he meditates over them chanting ohmmmmmmm rythmically.

Vlad - 5-2-2009 at 07:59

If you are so certain it's all BS why don't you try to reproduce it just to show it's all wrong and that it's just a nanocluster. I've seen pictures of the green goldchloride solution and if you can get that well then you might be able to show you have what you believe to be ordinary gold nanoparticles. But most of those who claim it's BS can't or won't even produce the green goldchloride solution. What does that say about their analytical and logical skills in chemistry then?

[Edited on 5-2-2009 by Vlad]

Vlad - 5-2-2009 at 08:26

Got this from archives: "Gold is not detected by ICP-MS in the green gold chloride solution."

not_important - 5-2-2009 at 10:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad
Got this from archives: "Gold is not detected by ICP-MS in the green gold chloride solution."

By conventional wisdom this would mean that there is no gold in the solution. As a fair amount of research has been done, and numerous commercial ventures depend on the proper detection of gold in samples, the claim that there is non-detectable gold in the green solution becomes an extraordinary claim and requires strong evidence from those making the claim to become a valid challenge. It is not up to the established view to prove the contrary.

As ICP-MS produces ions using a temperature of ~ 6000-8000 C from a plasma torch, and then MS to sort and detect those ions, the ORMUS gold must not ionise as normal gold at that temperature. Again, this goes against existing experience, claimants must provide evidence that there is indeed gold in the sample, prove after the sampling by recovering gold from it and not dismiss the detection of other elements as being the m-gold disguising itself.

The wide range of processes and conditions used to produce these claimed extraordinary forms of gold seem to be rather prone to losses and contamination. Better control would be needed for presenting as evidence. Claims the experienced chemists have done so in laboratory settings mean little without supportive evidence; I can claim that I performed such experiments and obtained a rather good grade of vanilla toffee, claims that expect you to accept unless you can disprove them.

So prepare a sample, present it for analysis along with the description of a process that will demonstrate that there indeed is gold in the sample, a way to detect that gold, and then you have a case.

unionised - 5-2-2009 at 11:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad
If you are so certain it's all BS why don't you try to reproduce it just to show it's all wrong and that it's just a nanocluster. I've seen pictures of the green goldchloride solution and if you can get that well then you might be able to show you have what you believe to be ordinary gold nanoparticles. But most of those who claim it's BS can't or won't even produce the green goldchloride solution. What does that say about their analytical and logical skills in chemistry then?

[Edited on 5-2-2009 by Vlad]

For the same reason I'm also not going to spend all night at the bottom of my garden looking for fairies.

They might be there, but it falls to those claiming they exist to show something like evidence first. A bloke trying to sell invisible gold doesn't count as evidence of anything more than human greed and gullibillity- and I already believe in those.

Among the aspects of my skills as a chemist is that I can get people to pay me money to do analyses. Why should I waste my rather expensive time on things that are known not to make sense like (here we go again) the missing 5% of stuff that's not missing?

Is non detectable gold what the Emperor's new clothes were made of?
Slightly more seriously; if the gold has some magic property that means it doesn't behave like gold, how do you make any use of it? After all- you can't sell non-detectable gold to a scrap metal merchant.

Sedit - 5-2-2009 at 12:47

Vlad on thing is that there is just to much evidence surmounted against hudsons claims.

I just as you was very intrieged when I first heard of this year ago because think of the possibilitys a room temperature superfluid/superconductor would have. But the one thing is you can not let bias get in the way of proper scientific methods and just as many others bias has clouded there judgement on this subject yours to is getting in the way of proper logic.

Wether hudson created this out of sheer tretchury or because he failed to understand basic principles of science will probly never be determined.

If you think about it he has had the 'patent' for over a decade now and the industry for room temperature superconductors is at a huge peak yet there has been no legitimate lab's that have confirmed his theory.
Now this is not to say that no one has tryed it but a chemist will probably be reluctant to notify anyone that he was going to attempt this until he showed any kind of results.Since no one has come forward with any results other then failers the on can only logicaly assume that this will not work.

I have also seen disscussion where it was brought up that his patent dosnt even exist! He applied for a patent but in his own words "it was declined because it contained 'sensitive material'" or in other words he failed to provide even the slightest threed of proof for his discovery.

When you look for a motive of why he would concoct a story such as this you find that his farm lands soil was of such a poor nature that only after treating it with tons of expensive chemicals and fertilizers he could still only use 1/3 of his land per year. This leads me to believe that he created this story to make claim that his worthless land was loaded up with gold and highly rare and highly reactive platinum group metals.

All in all logic can only tell someone that this is a story and nothing more although there is one thing that is mentioned that intrieges me a little bit, when he stated that he was testing the original sample he stated that an accurate measurment could not be taken because the sample changed in weight as the temperature changed. He denoted this as a change in mass of the amount of platinum saying that it gained mass as the sample was cooled and lost mass as the sample was heated which to me shows that he didnt know much of anything about how platinum metals work and he never took into account any hydrogen absorbing abilitys of the platinum group metals. This to me shows that he may have done some test on some kind of samples but he was just to inexperianced to every come to a proper conclusion as to what the samples contained.

~Sedit

Sauron - 5-2-2009 at 16:12

Wake me up when this thread is over.

Sedit - 5-2-2009 at 17:54

Your such a dork

Waffles - 5-2-2009 at 21:44

Ouch ouch ouch Sedit Sedit Sedit English English English

Sauron - 5-2-2009 at 23:42

There's more hard science in GHOSTBUSTERS than in David Hudson's frauds or this thread.

The man is a montebank.

Vlad - 6-2-2009 at 04:02

Quote:

All in all logic can only tell someone that this is a story and nothing more although there is one thing that is mentioned that intrieges me a little bit, when he stated that he was testing the original sample he stated that an accurate measurment could not be taken because the sample changed in weight as the temperature changed. He denoted this as a change in mass of the amount of platinum saying that it gained mass as the sample was cooled and lost mass as the sample was heated which to me shows that he didnt know much of anything about how platinum metals work and he never took into account any hydrogen absorbing abilitys of the platinum group metals. This to me shows that he may have done some test on some kind of samples but he was just to inexperianced to every come to a proper conclusion as to what the samples contained.

I heard of palladium's hydrogen absorbtion ability. It's interesting your point of view as I haven't thought of this either.

I agree that it looks like a fraud because of lack of proper science behind it, like references and everything. It's also hardly reproducable.
I however remain convinced the material is something worth checking out. There is a similar material I know how to make (I can't post the method however) that is related to monoatomic gold and ORMUS, is very easy to make, and shows unusual characteristics as well. It's called Red Gold and when I mention it's made electrochemically from gold wire and some salts I already hear claims of it being a gold colloid or nanocluster, however it's not like that apparently. According to the person who developed the method for producing the substance - an experienced chemical engineer - the red gold are gold diatoms. Gold has three valence electrons. The gold diatoms are triple bonded (to each other) gold atoms formed electochemically (it doesn't seem to work by standard chemistry) that are inert, red colored, and do not display characteristics of a colloid. In the engineer's words:

Quote:

The best physical support for the existence of diatoms I have seen so far is the fact that diatoms carry no surface charge. As some of you probably know, dispersed metal particles in a metal/water colloid always carry a surface charge. This can be shown by the fact that metal/water colloids are destabilized by a high or low pH. It is also shown by the fact that the suspended metal particles will migrate to a charged electrode. This is called electrophoresis. Both effects are caused by the fact that electrons in metals will migrate to the surface of a particle containing 3 or more metal atoms. The diatomic materials and the conjoined materials do not exhibit either property. In freshly formed materials, the suspension will show no change at any pH from 1 to 12 and there is no particle migration in an electric field. Thus, I feel I can safely conclude that the diatomics have no surface charge, which also implies that they are no longer metallic.

I added aqua regia to the freshly made Red Gold, and no apparent reaction could be seen either. Yet the substance is made from pure gold wire and some very basic salts with such a simple chemistry that rules out the formation of a complex gold salt.

[Edited on 6-2-2009 by Vlad]

Vlad - 6-2-2009 at 04:07

Now where there is the apparent link with David Hudson's ORMEs, is that the Red Gold apparently forms an oily substance that is very volatile. This same oily substance can be made from gold metal in other ways, and when dried, it becomes a white powder. This is conjecture, but the dried white powder shows similar characteristics to Hudson's white powder. So it could be safe to assume it's the same substance made by different ways. Hudson just popularized his version of research about it.

Vlad - 6-2-2009 at 04:09

Quote:

Originally posted by unionised
Slightly more seriously; if the gold has some magic property that means it doesn't behave like gold, how do you make any use of it? After all- you can't sell non-detectable gold to a scrap metal merchant.

It's a healing substance, and when ingested, causes intense dreams and sometimes enhances virility.

[Edited on 6-2-2009 by Vlad]

Sauron - 6-2-2009 at 04:19

Oh come ON. This is a SCIENCE forum, cut the magical newage sewage please! Gold is not in PDR. Have you done controlled double blinded clinical trials on those enhanced dreams and virility claims? Pfizer have made a lot of gelt from enhacing virility but not by peddling gold, but raking it in.

What a total crock of dung!

Are we sure these are not the Red Mercury hucksters back under another handle?

I keep waiting for the flying saucers, the hidden cities inside the magnetic poles, the chariots of the gods, the Illuminati, the Rosicrucians, the Church of Scientology, Anton what's his name, Charles Fort, Seth Speaks, Alistair Crowley, the Theosophists, and all the other dreary derivative rehashed psuedomystical claptrap that is beneath our contempt to surface in this thread. How about homeopathic medicine? Amish hex signs? The Maleus Malificarum? I best you really get off on Dan Brown.

I best my posts have an aura of evil.

[Edited on 6-2-2009 by Sauron]

Vlad - 6-2-2009 at 04:22

The enhanced dreaming is a fact. Many people have noticed this. Many. I can agree with claims about enhancing virility being dubious but it definitely does enhance dreaming.

Sauron - 6-2-2009 at 05:13

That is what we scientists call anecdotal, which is a technical term for bullshit.

It is most certainly not a fact and has not been demonstrated by the standard means for such things, the double blinded controlled clinical trial.

Till it is, stow it with the rest of the superstitious effluvia.

not_important - 6-2-2009 at 05:13

Internal events like dreaming are, amazingly, subjective and can be driven by no more than the mind set of the person.

Experienced opiate users can get a rush from injecting saline, or just sliding the needle of an empty syringe into their skin, or even just holding the syrine. These action cause objectively measurable physiological changes in the subject, changes that match those from an actual injection.

Double blind tests, monitoring of the subject, and similar means are needed to verify result; elsewise you're just dealing with anecdotal remarks from interested parties.

watson.fawkes - 6-2-2009 at 05:52

@Vlad: I have a fair amount of patience for people who want to pursue fringe science. There have been plenty of incidents in history when new ideas come in completely from the outside. The bulk of results in science have not come this way, though, and if you want to pursue this, you should expect that you may well never discover anything relative to the outside world. You might push discussion forward within a circle of enthusiasts. This board does not contain those enthusiasts. I'm certainly not one.

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad
If you are so certain it's all BS why don't you try to reproduce it just to show it's all wrong and that it's just a nanocluster.

Now here's your very basic and fundamental flaw. Existence of something, whether it be a mathematical theorem or a lab technique, is something that must be demonstrated by its proponent. not_important said this quite well already:

Quote:

Originally posted by not_important
Proponents of ORMUS are the ones who must present sufficient evidence to call into question the established theories.

Vlad, you apparently do not understand that the burden of demonstration is on you, not us. If you want someone else to try to disprove this, you will first have to show some reason why anyone else should care. You have not done this. You've made a few uncontrolled preparations. The photos you posted, while interesting, by your own admission have not been reproduced. That's certainly not enough work to convince anybody of anything, nor to persuade them to spend their time on your project.

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad
The enhanced dreaming is a fact. Many people have noticed this. Many. I can agree with claims about enhancing virility being dubious but it definitely does enhance dreaming.

You assert this without naming whose dreaming is enhanced. Is it yours? Or are these reports you are forwarding? Let's establish one thing first. No one outside the circle of enthusiasts cares about second- or third-hand reports. There's too much actual charlatanism about for this to be credible. So please just stop quoting people. If the dreaming is yours, fine, but you've done plenty of appeals to authorities whose authority no one here acknowledges.

I do suspect that you might be able to convince some people here to learn how to become a good enough lab chemist to get to something like a reproducible result. But if you want anybody to take any interest in that, you'll have to first acknowledge that you're working on an outsider theory and second act accordingly. This means that you should never insist that anybody take interest your theoretical musings. Note that I've already switched into the no-third-party-authority mode. As far as I'm concerned, these theories are yours (as held, not as invented), and I don't particularly care to engage them.

So, here's an action item for you. Start a web site and keep your lab notebook on it. Do not use a blog, because you can't organize random postings well enough for anybody to spend time slogging through them. Since it's reproducibility everyone else is looking for, you'll need to separate your work into two: one separate from issues of subjectivity and one with subjective reports. It's not that subjectivity can't be a proper mode of effort, it's that its far, far harder to do anything with, and most others will have no interest in it.

Then, expect to do lots and lots and lots of procedures, first seeking some kind of reproducibility, eventually yielding some kind of fully-reproducible baseline procedure. Then you can switch to an exploratory mode, each time varying exactly one parameter from the baseline, either material or apparatus. Do each more than once so that you get reproducible positive or negative results. You can then expand your list of reproducible positives and continue to expand the list varying exactly one parameter at a time. Yes, this is exactly combinatorial explosion of a parameter space. It is also exactly the kind of care you're going to require if you are to convince someone else to care enough to attempt to reproduce your results.

watson.fawkes - 6-2-2009 at 05:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Vlad
The enhanced dreaming is a fact. Many people have noticed this. Many.

Time for some practice. It's not a fact. It's an assertion. It's your assertion. You were appealing to authorities not recognized here. You were wasting your breath here, not in any existential sense of waste, but in a purely pragmatic sense, in that your words did not convince anybody of your claim. Indeed, they were damaging to you, since you have illustrated an absence of respect for other people's beliefs, which contradict yours.

hissingnoise - 6-2-2009 at 10:01

Well put w.f---the coup de grace, at last. . .

Sauron - 6-2-2009 at 10:17

I doubt the dinosaur will realize it is dead for some time. Brain is too small and too remote from the site of the impalement just administered.

Somewhat ironic, impaling a Vlad, isn' it?

[Edited on 7-2-2009 by Sauron]

Innerspace - 9-2-2009 at 09:22

This is my first time posting here, and as this topic is of significant importance I'll start here. First and foremost there are other ways of creating materials that are commonly referred to as Monatomic, Diatomic, M-state, ORMUS, Nano Colloidal, or High Spin State. As this topic deals mainly with the chemical approach, and you seem to have so much doubt about the validity of results (mainly due to Hudson's credibility), some might choose to try a different route. I will cover several things that appear not to have been mentioned, and hopefully these will provide some additional points of reference. I don't work for anyone, and I'm not selling anything, this is simply a subject of interest to me. I'm a research scientist and entrepreneur so I tend to examine topical studies that fall "outside the box" on a regular basis. This will be a little long winded, but it needs to be said. Let's get started.

There is a scholarly work that goes into the multifaceted areas of this topic, and it was penned by one Sir Laurence Gardner. The work is titled "Lost Secrets of The Sacred Ark". As the name implies there is a generous amount of speculation regarding the legendary Ark of he Covenant from biblical notoriety, but the book also contains a wealth of information from multiple sources regarding our materials in question.

Within the work, David Hudson is of course mentioned and to some of the posts that appeared to be a personal attack, his background is explained a little better in the book. While Mr. Hudson might not have been as forthcoming about the errors in his experiments, he was hardly a "poor dirt farmer". Poor dirt farmers don't have the access to the capital which his facilities required, nor do they have state level connections which authorized his initial soil experiments. You can of course assume whatever you wish, I don't know if the facts support it.

Hudson's work aside, there is a wealth or information regarding the use of these materials in archeological, anthropological, and historical sources. Sir Gardner's afore mentioned work highlights a number of these sources, and the scholarly references are all in the appendix. That alone is worth the price of the book, I assure you.

Of interesting note would be the finding of these materials in tombs across Greater Egypt, or what could be more accurately called Khemet. An archeological expedition that almost failed was launched to ascertain the location of what was believed to be a manufacturing facility for Monatomics in the Sinai Peninsula. The archeologist's claims were widely discounted as the accepted dogma of Egyptology said that nothing Egyptian would have existed that far from the accepted kingdom. Needless to say, the expedition was a success, and a temple/facility was located at the top of Mt. Horeb. Within the temple were found metallurgical tools, most notable a very large crucible. The crucible appeared to have been scorched by extremely intense flame however, there was no residue of carbon, and no visible flame source like a coal or fire pit. Under the flagstones on which the crucible rested was found a large storage basin. This contained at least a metric ton of what appeared to be a silicate material. Some of this material as well as the artifacts that the expedition found were shipped to the British Museum, and they are still housed at this location. The materials later turned out to be our infamous monatomics. The historical records indicate that this material was ingested by nobility, and the priest craft. Do some homework, see if you find it valid.

The reason for that long-winded background information is so that you might wonder about the production method that was used by these Egyptians, as well as some of the Alchemists throughout history. There is at least one company in Utah that uses Arc Electricity to make nanocollodial gold as well as other nanocollodial noble group metals. I have not yet had an opportunity to experiment with them, but I plan to this summer. There is an peer reviewed article on www.zptech.net that discusses the application of nanocollodial gold in cancer treatments. The results were impressive.

I personally know 2 scientists who used this material in conjunction with Silica Hydride to bring a terminal cancer patient from a feeding tube, to being home within 2 weeks. He walked back into the hospital one month after starting the combination, in remission. There were other factors involved that create study bias, but the main factor was the materials mentions and an alkalizing diet. This is reproducible, and has been.

Understanding cellular resonance in relation to disease is the demonstration model for explaining how the materials work. Georges Lahovsky's work on cellular resonance which led to his creation of the Multiple Wave Oscillator can be found in "The Secret of Life" and "The Waves That Heal". Much like holding two identical tuning forks and striking one while holding it next to the other, the unstruck fork will begin to resonate the frequency of the resonating fork. Your cellular communication systems work in the same way. The individual cell can experience only so much toxicity until is is damaged and no longer communicates properly. This is the nature of disease. I would also mention Dr. Royal Raymond Rife's work on resonant frequencies and pathogen elimination.

To address the individual who scoffed at the importance of mindset and intentions in experimentation, I would mention the "Observer Effect" which relates to a particle's behavior when it is under observation. You can find this data is most collegiate physics books in the quantum section. Things behave differently when observed, it's a fact. I'm sure that statement rings true with each and every one of you. Just think about someone watching you do any task. I mentioned this because not all forms of energy are as overt as say electricity, some have a more subtle character. The radiations of thought would be one of these energies.

In summation, chemical means might not be the most effective in trying to produce these materials. Applied frequencies, Arc Flame of a certain temp, and the right mindset would probably go a lot further in accomplishing your goals. Quite a bit of this area remains unexplored and unexplained. There is definitely something to all of this and I wish you all the best in your explorations. Look to certain sea salts (Celtic and Dead Sea) if you wish the continue chemical means of experimentation. The planet has done some of the work for you by pre-engineering base materials. Most importantly, unplug yourself from a consensus reality and do your own investigations. That's the nature of real science.

"We're not the center of what?"
-The Inquisiton to Galileo

Innerspace - 9-2-2009 at 09:42

I also forgot to mention Masura Emoto's work with thought forms affecting water structure. While is has been polularized and some of the work taken out of context, his work would indeed support the position that thought energies have an effect on water structure. This is evidence of a subtle energy or radiant energy at work. By this logic, when somenone is performing experiments with these materials, they may be responding to thought forms. Hence the importance of intention. There is a significant amount of peer reviewed material in this area, I suggest some research in the Psychology, Parapsychology, and Quantum Physics journals. You could also look into Mr. Emoto's work, for which he recieved peer awards and international noteriety. Make observations. Support claims with evidence. If you can't find it in someone else's work, try to find it on your own. If not found, potentially false. If found, patent the hell out of it! Basic Science.

"Don't worry about that missing link, it rolled of the plate and the dog ate it."
-Darwin discussing evolution over breakfast at sea

hissingnoise - 9-2-2009 at 11:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Innerspace

This is my first time posting here, and as this topic is of significant importance I'll start here.

Welcome to SciMad, Innerspace.
Because you're new, I read both posts fully.
However, I think Sauron's description of the topic still holds.
The very gullible might be moved to pause, but anyone here with a full scientific bent will see your posts as representing more of the tedious pseudo-science we've already endured.
You sound. BTW, more entrepreneurial than scientific.
And you cannot be both, since the disciplines are mutually exclusive.
Pseudo-science often excites the masses in a faddish fashion but anyone with an interest in real science should be above all that.
I would, with respect, put this stuff on a par with creationism.
It has no place here. . .

Incidentally, when referring to a member of the peerage it is customary always to use the forename rather than the surname.

[Edited on 9-2-2009 by hissingnoise]

@Innerspace

watson.fawkes - 9-2-2009 at 13:09

If you're not Vlad under a new account name, my apologies, but you are illustrating all the problems with the posts made under that account.

Quote:

Originally posted by Innerspace
Do some homework, see if you find it valid.[...]
Most importantly, unplug yourself from a consensus reality and do your own investigations. That's the nature of real science.[...]

Recall. You have the burden of evidence of encouraging someone else to spend their time on your project. Everyone else has their own preexisting interests. It's not like there's a whole lot of free-floating project time around here ready to be harvested.

Quote:

There is an peer reviewed article on www.zptech.net that discusses the application of nanocollodial gold in cancer treatments.[...]

At what URL? More generally, you make claims of the form "there are studies". If you want anybody to read them, don't expect them to do even a whit of research more than clicking on a link. As before, they don't care. It's you're responsibility to convince them to care, and since your interest is polluted with pseudoscience charlatans, you have a higher bar than ordinary.

Quote:

To address the individual who scoffed at the importance of mindset and intentions in experimentation, I would mention the "Observer Effect" which relates to a particle's behavior when it is under observation. You can find this data is most collegiate physics books in the quantum section. Things behave differently when observed, it's a fact. I'm sure that statement rings true with each and every one of you.

You are completely mistaken. This rings completely false with me. The speed of decoherence present in a macroscopic object such as a human body is just enormous. (If you don't know what decoherence in quantum mechanics is, go find out.) To claim that there's enough coherence in such a body requires a burden of proof that's on you. My default assumption is that it's not there. There's some circumstantial evidence that biological systems have something like an anomalous kind of coherence; see Luca Turin's book on the sense of smell, but his idea only require such an anomaly at the level of the δ-structure of a membrane protein cluster. To extend this to an entire organism requires evidence.

I'll mention only in passing that you're also appealing to authorities that have no authority on this board, and also in passing only that promoting out-of-mainstream theories without evidence or experiment is a waste of your time.

Sauron - 10-2-2009 at 04:53

My bullshitometer is pegged all the way to the right at its highest scale, which can cope with BS approximately the lass of Uranus.

Innerspace, newage sewage belongs in the newage sewer, of which this forum forms no part.

"Secrets of the Lost Ark", give us all a break, after all we have all seen the film with H.Ford. The Ark is in a crate in a military warehouse somewhere in AREA 51 on the grounds of Nellis Air Force Base, near Las Vegas. The Scientologists tried to heist it but they were beaten back by a Last Alliance of Illuminati and Mr.Grays (from the planet Skyron in the galazxy of Andromeda. It was all part of a cosmos-girdling conspiracy to have the blancmanges win at Wimbledon.

And as silly as that paragraph is, it isn't a pimple on the left buttock of the farcical nature of your own posts.

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 08:41

Honest to god I feel time may prove your bullshitometer may just be due for a new battery,which Im sure you will disagree on but none the lest nano gold is proving it self very useful in many fields and Iv pulled a few papers for show and tell.

Due to the abilitys of finely divided metals Iv always liked the concept of ORMUS but it has been hard to find any hard data on the subject due to the disposition of its supposed creater.
It makes me really wish that the creater of this threed started it as a discussion of gold nano particals instead of a discussion of ORMUS because being a fairly new concept and its usefulness in chemistry the last three years or so since this threed was created alot could have come from its disscussion and the author could have made his own inferences on how this relates to ORMUS.

Intriguing to me is this discovery of natural gold nano particals that apear in salty grounds simular to the soil said to isolate the ormus hudson talked about.

Quote:

Nature's Own Nano Gold Found

Larry O'Hanlon, Discovery News e-mail share bookmark print

Nature's Own: July 17, 2008
---------------------------------
Miniscule triangular and hexagonal plates of gold less than 20 nanometers thin and identical to those manufactured by humans have been found occurring naturally in salty groundwaters of Western Australia.........

Refrence:http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/07/17/nano-gold-nature.html

It goes on to state how these have been previously over looked due to there small sizes ect...

Here is a decent little paper on the catalytic abilities of gold nano clusters and its capabilitys for conversion of CO to CO2

Quote:

Scientists in Japan discovered 10 years ago that gold displays fantastic catalytic abilities when it is shrunk to 3 to 5 nm in size. If the gold particles are any bigger or smaller than this, the element resumes its inertness.
One such reaction is the conversion of carbon-monoxide (CO) to carbon-dioxide (CO2). Nanogold catalyzes this at room temperature and with 100-percent efficiency. A potential application is to aid firefighters, who now wear protective masks containing copper-manganese-oxide. That material's effectiveness at getting rid of CO, however, lasts only 15 minutes, while nanogold protects for several hours.

Refrence:http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/04/040428062059.htm

Artical talking about gold nanostructures made from gold salts and Tofu basicly.
Soybeans strike nanogold.
Refrence:http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2007/November/06110702.asp

A small artical on Nano gold catalyst.
Refrence:http://chemicalsabbatical.blogspot.com/2008/09/nano-gold-catalysts.html

Most of these discussed Au120 or the likes does any one have refrence to Au1 or Au2? Some very very small divided form of it should be the next step here and I am Highly considering starting a new legitimate threed where david hudson dont live. As long as I dont find one already made I think I will.

Does anyone know of ways to accomplish something of these sorts with cheeper materials such as copper or iron?
~Sedit

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 08:41

[edit]Double post.

[Edited on 10-2-2009 by Sedit]

Sauron - 10-2-2009 at 09:55

The battery on the BSM checks out just fine.

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 10:03

So it all truth fullness do you honestly believe that mono atomic gold or Au1 can not exist?

Sauron - 10-2-2009 at 10:07

I have no idea, but I am confident David Hudson has no idea, either.

Nicodem - 10-2-2009 at 10:13

Sedit, I think you are confusing gold nanoclusters (like Au55 nanoclusters which are relatively easily prepared and are of size <5nm) with the subject of this thread (which to me is not really clear and I do not follow it, but I do notice that the main promoters do not care much about science and use crap talk in place of evidence). Anyway, Au55 is known and possible, but a solution of atomic gold is pure fantasy as it would imply H2O (or any other solvent) can ligate Au atoms so efficiently as it does not. Plain, unligated Au atoms would have such an enormous internal energy they would immediately cluster together into larger aggregates (for example, Au55 or higher) or even react with oxygen or water which elemental gold otherwise can not. With proper ligands it might be possible to have monoatomic Au(0), but this would be a complex, like for example the complex between Pd(0) and triphenylphosphine.

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 10:21

Nope no confusion Nicodem and I feel that Hudson and the general topic of this threed is pretty shady to say the lest so I feel that a threed talking about nano clusters would be the best bet to get prejudice out of the way of disscussion.

However I think you answered my question of the validity of Au(1) or (0). Perhaps you are correct because at that small of a unit reactions with anything in the vicinity would react with it. Chealating agents could possibly produce the single gold atom but a complex is not exactly what I had in mind.

Nicodem - 10-2-2009 at 10:38

Opening a new thread about gold nanoclusters would be an excellent idea. I for one am quite interested about it. Besides, it would also give the opportunity to discuss about it on a scientific level and leave those who prefer faith based arguments in this thread. I propose you open this new thread with an introduction based on the references you found up to now.
Did you know it is possible to prepare chiral gold nanoclusters? Crazy, isn't it?

not_important - 10-2-2009 at 11:10

The existence of gold nanoparticles is well documented, as the difference in properties of bulk and nanocluster forms of elements. However the elements in these don't become undetectable to conventional analytic methods, and there is considerable theoretical underpinning of the properties of them.

For instance, the catalytic oxidation of CO promoted by gold nanoparticles :

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/ulandman/2007/p...

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/ulandman/2007/3...

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/ulandman/302.pd...

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/ulandman/304.pd...

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/ulandman/303.pd...

Research on small clusters of gold

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/ulandman/284.pd...

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/ulandman/278_ha...

suggest that clusters with even numbers of gold atoms are more stable than those with odd numbers, that these small clusters interact with other atoms and molecules to form slightly larger structures, and that monoatomic gold is not terribly stable. Indeed it appears to me that the interesting catalytic activities happen with clusters of 7 to 20-something atoms, smaller clusters linking up or if suitably protected existing as less active entities.

The bonding in these clusters involves relativistic effects, which are also responsible for the colour of bulk gold. These clusters are generally stabilized by surface layers of thiols or by absorption on the surface of other compounds in bulk form (as is the case with the carbon monoxide oxidation catalysts, where the MgO plays an important role). Midsized organic molecules such as the gummy carbohydrates also have been used to stabilise colloidal and nano particles for quite some time..

Note that in this research gold is more reactive than in the bulk form, the opposite of the purported ORMUS gold, whose activities are of an esoteric rather than chemical nature.

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 11:16

Im in the process of writting up a new threed so we can lock David Hudson out but its lunchtime so itll have to wait an hour or so.

Sauron - 10-2-2009 at 12:02

I suspect you will find that vlad & Co. will not be so easily curtailed.

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 12:08

Well them and hudson always have a home here in this threed but I would advise them if they want to learn more and possibly produce some of the substances they seek that they go to the new threed and learn a little science being the madness.

~Sedit

Sauron - 10-2-2009 at 19:42

Actually, a LOT of science. Because this topic (new) goes well beyong amateur experimentalism, doesn't it?

Anyway if the new thread sticks to solid science, with proper terminology and is well referenced (and not to books about Hebrew mythology) then I will have no problems with it.

But if it turns to alchemy in Arizona...mumbojumbo in Mozambique or voodoo among the Virgins, well, the Bullshitometer is active.

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 20:28

I dont feel to much of what I posted in the other one is out of reach for an amateur. Albeit some of it may be but that is to be expected if one wants to put any kind of usable data in there. For instance How is mixing soybean powder and gold salts or gold salts mixed with gum arabic as it precipates to form nano clusters hard? Also Bacteria can structure some forms of platinum which I think will be its greatest use for chemist yet.
Hardly out of reach I think. New threed was created in a rush anyway and mainly wanted to slap some of the fundementals out there for the time being then move on into theory later down the line when I determine how I want to go about creating them

~Sedit

[Edited on 10-2-2009 by Sedit]

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 21:19

Well arn't you just a peach.
No my freind these are real experiments performed by real scientist. The gums and the bacteria are used for stablizing the nano clusters in specific sizes. These are general methods being developed to try to get away from vapor desposition of the nano clusters.

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 22:35

Scoff all you like but I have already posted the link to the RCS artical that spoke of this.
There claim is that soy contains phytochemicals then stabilise the nanoparticles, preventing from fusing together into a larger structures. Do I fully understand it as of now.. Nope but they are also not the only one performing experiments like this just the only ones using chemicals in soy to do so.

http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2007/November/0611070...

If you must scoff do so in the other threed after reading the links that are posted so we can put this threed to rest.
I can not validate every thing that is in the links I posted there and I make no claims on compleatly understanding the way that nano structures are formed hence the reason for the discussion of them. Now it appears that due to this threed you seem reluctant to believe that nano cluster exist at all and that would be compleatly failed logic.

Sauron - 10-2-2009 at 22:54

You do understand what peer reviewed journal means?

What you linked to was what we call a puff piece.

Written by an RSC staffer.

Here it is

"Soybeans strike nanogold

06 November 2007

A simple mix of soybeans, water and gold salts may hold the secret to producing gold nanoparticles without harming the environment, according to one team of US researchers. The discovery could provide easy access to the valuable particles, which have a growing range of potential applications from cancer therapy to telecommunications.

'We have developed a process that is inherently non-toxic - we do not make use of any chemicals at all, except for a commercially available gold precursor,' Kattesh Katti, the researcher leading the team, told Chemistry World. The scientists, based at the University of Missouri, have patented their discovery and created a company to develop the technology further.

Current methods of gold nanoparticle production require a variety of reagents such as hydrazine, sodium borohydride and dimethyl formamide. This makes the process costly and potentially toxic, making it awkward to produce nanoparticles that are suitable for medical applications.

"We have developed a process that is inherently non-toxic - we do not make use of any chemicals at all, except for a commercially available gold precursor"
- Kattesh Katti
The new process uses ordinary soybeans, commonly used to make soymilk or tofu, added to water. Soybeans are known to be a 'superfood', containing a wide variety of beneficial non-toxic chemicals. These naturally active 'phytochemicals' leach out into the water and when gold salts are added, they reduce the gold ions in the solution to nanoparticles. Different phytochemicals then stabilise the nanoparticles, preventing from fusing together into a larger gold metallic structure.

'This process produces uniform nanoparticles that are an ideal size for biomedical use,' Katti added. However, he would not comment further on the chemicals involved or how the nanoparticles were made and stabilised.

Katti's team became interested in using plants to make nanoparticles when they discovered last year that gum arabic, a common food additive taken from the acacia tree, was able to form a coating around gold nanoparticles that makes them stable and nontoxic.1

Ravi Saraf, at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, US, uses gold nanoparticles in his research into bacteria. 'We need to be careful - although no chemicals are being used, reducing gold can still produce potentially toxic compounds,' he warned. 'However, if this process does prove to be environmentally-friendly throughout, then it will be a big thing. There are new applications for gold nanoparticles emerging all the time.'

Lewis Brindley"

Is that really what you want to advance as literature support?

Where's the beef?

[Edited on 11-2-2009 by Sauron]

Sedit - 10-2-2009 at 23:04

"You do understand what peer reviewed journal means?"
Nope, not compleatly anyway,but I do know that that isnt one but mearly a tool to understand the direction that differnt research these areas are taking.
Many of the biosynthesis of nano clusters seem to be in relative infancy and it may take me some time before I locate a well written publishing on its process seeing as I dont have access to many newer papers.

Never the lest there are a few nice ones that are along the lines that you speak of that I will post tommorow.

watson.fawkes - 10-2-2009 at 23:07

There's a footnote in that RSC article: V Kattumuri et al, Small, 2007, 3, 333 (DOI: 10.1002/smll.200600427).

It's plausible enough. Gum acacia is a highly branched polysaccharide. Plenty of steric effects to go around.

Sauron - 10-2-2009 at 23:25

A peer reviewed scientific journal is one in which all articles are submitted for review prior to publication to a referee or referrees who are eminent figures in the specialized subject matter, there is then an exchange between the referree(s) an the autho(s) of the pepr resulting in additions and corrections. When the referrees are satisfied onlyt then is the paper published.

The paper must meet the standards of the journal and follow its format.

Background, references, detailed experimental procedures and results, and analytical data inclusing instrumental analysis are required. For any novel compounds claimed rigorous proof of structure and full physico-chemical characterization is required.

The ultimate test of the credibility of an article is REPRODUCIBILITY. Sufficient information needs to be provided so that the results can be replicated, and if they cannot, the authors will probably stand in the corner wearing dunce's caps. Viz. the authors of the infamous Cold Fusion debacle.

Kattesh Katti of U.Missouri has supposedly filed a US patent application, if so that is a public document. Patents have a somewhat different standard to meet than do scientific peer reviewed journal articles. Katti and colleagues are obviously being entreprenurial (they formed a company) and trying to obtain intellectual property rights is part and parcel of that. So is self promotion like posturing for that puffery in CHEMICAL WORLS.

What I want to see is the hard science in peer reviewed journals.

If there isn't any then, this might as well be the production of Unobtainium, or Gold Kryptonite a la DC Comics.

Because, sedit, THIS is how science is done.

Vlad - 11-2-2009 at 03:22

Quote:

Plain, unligated Au atoms would have such an enormous internal energy they would immediately cluster together into larger aggregates (for example, Au55 or higher) or even react with oxygen or water which elemental gold otherwise can not.

The Red Gold process I learned from the chemical engineer is claimed to create inert diatoms that form a polymer with water. I have noticed in this process if it's not performed correctly, an ordinary colloid (light pink-magenta) is created, but if done correctly the Red Gold forms. The chemical engineer claims the diatoms polymerize the water molecules around it and that this forms a waxy solid.

I mixed the solution of Red Gold with a magnesium hydroxide precipitate, which then became pink-red colored indicating a reaction of some sort. Then I dried the precipitate, and dissolved the dried precipitate in a NH4Cl solution. This left me with a dark red powder that won't dissolve in aqua regia.

I don't know if this would be a nanocluster but it's still interesting to make a small gold compound like that that doesn't behave like ordinary gold.

(Yes this is not peer reviewed info I know just mentioning this because I think it's an interesting substance)

Sauron - 11-2-2009 at 03:39

Sounds more like Red Mercury all the time!

Vlad - 11-2-2009 at 04:09

I don't see why you have to criticise this. It's a novel process, not peer reviewed I realize, but isn't this an amateur science forum? If it was for discussions of peer reviewed processes all the time it would be more a professional scientist forum imo.
All I was trying to say is exotic undiscovered substances still exist. I see no reason why you should consider it quackery. Did I mention anything esoteric? I don't think so.

[Edited on 11-2-2009 by Vlad]

Sauron - 11-2-2009 at 04:57

No references, no details, no reproducibility, no credibility = no science.

Stop pulling our legs.

Reread your own posts, vlad and take stock of many times and how far you have placed yourself away from anythinbg that can be called Science by anyone but Mary Baker Eddy or L.Ron Hubbard.

Your sort of Science is a lot like Soviet psychiatry...an oxymoron.

[Edited on 11-2-2009 by Sauron]

Pages: 1 2