Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Give yourself an introduction here and get to know the other members.

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby kiorionis » Mon Feb 02, 2015 8:50 am

SolarSeeker wrote:
kiorionis wrote:
SolarSeeker wrote:You can create something that is the white philosopher's stone from a chemistry stands point, but it lacks the raw power needed for transmutation.


Why does it lack raw power?
And if it lacks raw power to transmute, is it really the Stone?


From a chemistry stands point it is the stone, it's just incomplete.


I thought chemistry wasn't able to define the Stone as anything?
Art is Nature in the flask. Nature is a vial thing.
User avatar
kiorionis
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:07 pm

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby SolarSeeker » Mon Feb 02, 2015 11:43 pm

Everything that exists is made of something,even the philosopher's stone.
SolarSeeker
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:10 pm

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby Flightoffire » Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:35 pm

Chemists can't define it because they do not have it and do not want to learn. It is a physical substance, as SolarSeeker accurately stated.

@ Alchemist, the BOA method will not work as it is not the correct path. It is too much 'the work of Man' and not the 'work of Nature'.

Where in Nature do you see high temperature kilns, or a mortar and pestle, or an alembic? You don't. Yes we need tools to help us with the Work BUT only as long as our methods are in alignment with Natural Law and Natural processes. Super high heat, mortar and pestle, ... all that hands on stuff, not needed.

FOF
Be Still, and Know Who You Are.
Flightoffire
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 2:03 pm

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby Rohan » Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:13 pm

Flightoffire wrote:
@ Alchemist, the BOA method will not work as it is not the correct path. It is too much 'the work of Man' and not the 'work of Nature'.

Where in Nature do you see high temperature kilns, or a mortar and pestle, or an alembic? You don't. Yes we need tools to help us with the Work BUT only as long as our methods are in alignment with Natural Law and Natural processes. Super high heat, mortar and pestle, ... all that hands on stuff, not needed.

FOF


I disagree on that "the book of aquarius will not work thing"
It follows natures laws, it is basically translations book of what early alchemist said , and the calcination part I got the white salts following it,
The Boa method will yield you the stone.
though it will take time, which Solarseeker's way wont.
Rohan
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 10:53 pm

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby Alchemist » Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:10 am

It's too late to stop now. You're right though, I do not see in nature such high temperatures but I also don't see the stone. Making the stone is about accelerating the process right? How long does it take a tree to fully grow? A long while. But for 3 years of it being the average time to finish the process (The Great Work) I feel as though some bits of changes could be made and not changes of nature but change in the sense where you continue to operate how nature operates but by means of working in ways that would cause the operation to speed up.

That being said I will continue to work with this method and I will also continue to study and learn more on alchemy. What does and doesn't work doesn't matter too much. This art is now rising to the surface and we should feel lucky because we're like those first few commenters on a YouTube video, or a cast who just finished making their movie.. Likewise, we're the first few in today's society to really learn and practice the art. Ive seen a lot of posts on this site and many of you have gotten pretty far!

Thanks to you all for such a warm welcoming.
Last edited by Alchemist on Sat Apr 11, 2015 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Alchemist
 

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby SolarSeeker » Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:54 am

Alchemist wrote:It's too late to stop now. You're right though, I do not see in nature such high temperatures but I also don't see the stone.


That's because you aren't looking where metals actually grow.

Deep in the earth where the metals grow the fastest you have molten pools of magma,that seldom cool down. Closer to the surface you have the gentile action of water where metals grow VERY slowly, but rocks seem to have no problems growing surprisingly quickly. (look up trovants they grow noticeably in a day) Then you have nuclear reactors, the fuel is refined from nature but it creates every single element on the periodic table,which is why it emits a LOT of heat and loses power in a relatively short amount of time, chaotically transmuting everything around it at random. (Including turning the lead shielding into gold,among other things)
SolarSeeker
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:10 pm

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby Alchemist » Sat Apr 11, 2015 7:12 pm

SolarSeeker wrote:
Alchemist wrote:It's too late to stop now. You're right though, I do not see in nature such high temperatures but I also don't see the stone.


That's because you aren't looking where metals actually grow.

Deep in the earth where the metals grow the fastest you have molten pools of magma,that seldom cool down. Closer to the surface you have the gentile action of water where metals grow VERY slowly, but rocks seem to have no problems growing surprisingly quickly. (look up trovants they grow noticeably in a day) Then you have nuclear reactors, the fuel is refined from nature but it creates every single element on the periodic table,which is why it emits a LOT of heat and loses power in a relatively short amount of time, chaotically transmuting everything around it at random. (Including turning the lead shielding into gold,among other things)

Hearing you say that kind of reminds me of how the author of The Book of Aquarius mentioned high heats. When you first quoted me I was actually directing that message to Flight in response to ''Where in Nature do you see high temperature kilns, or a mortar and pestle, or an alembic? You don't. Yes we need tools to help us with the Work BUT only as long as our methods are in alignment with Natural Law and Natural processes. Super high heat, mortar and pestle, ... all that hands on stuff, not needed.''
At the time I didn't know how to exactly quote peoples messages until I found out later on. I do think the high heats is necessary which is why I said that bits of changes can be made, but not changes of nature but changes in which will cause the operation to be sped up. I appreciate you for telling me about where the metals grow the fastest. I'll look up the 'Trovants' later on today and learn more. SolarSeeker, assuming you do think high heats are necessary have you ever thought about reading BOA? I have read on the few posts of other members saying they haven't read it and I don't know if that was you or not.
Alchemist
 

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby Flightoffire » Sun Apr 12, 2015 2:14 am

Rohan wrote:I disagree on that "the book of aquarius will not work thing"

It follows natures laws, it is basically translations book of what early alchemist said, and the calcination part I got the white salts following it.
The Boa method will yield you the stone.
though it will take time, which Solarseeker's way wont.

The one rule that stopped people from using unqualified opinions and unfounded claims in the old BOA forum to justify their 'method' was brilliant. Unfortunately they are not being followed or applied by quite a few people in this forum - No claims unless you can back them up with quotes from the original pre-18th century alchemy texts, or lab results ('lab', being your spare room, shed, kitchen, etc).

You have made claims that have absolutely nothing to back them up other than you saying so. You are also saying your way will work (with nothing to support you) and that Solar Seeker's way will not with, again, nothing to support you.

The BOA method does NOT follow 'natural laws' at all, and is not 'basically a translation' of the old texts. It is a misunderstanding of the old texts. You also need to remember that the old alchemists wrote in code so a direct translation is not possible, only a proper interpretation of the symbols and codes.

Even the Author stated right towards the end "it is all metaphor". In other words, the old texts are NOT to be interpreted literally but to be decoded. I too stated clearly that I was not comfortable with all this hands on high heat stuff.

Like I keep saying, the BOA method is too much the 'work of Man' and not the 'work of Nature' and thus can't work. A number of us (including people in this forum) have proven this to a greater or lesser degree. Even just reading through the texts will tell you that. The Alchemical Omnibus has HEAPS of good clear quotes but hardly ever do I see anyone in here posting/quoting them, preferring to offer unqualified opinions and unfounded claims with nothing to back them up. This is very poor form.

I would strongly recommend (several) people in here start taking a more 'scientific' approach to this by backing up claims with quotes or results.

I read a post recently in this forum that wise stated until people properly understand the theory and philosophy of alchemy, they will not succeed.

I quite agree.

A couple of times I have made comment to a couple of people when I saw proper results but they did not pick up on it or follow through, preferring to go with their 'opinion' and faulty BOA methodology. :roll:

"The teacher will arrive when the student is ready", is true but if the 'student' does not want to pick up on what he teachers around them are saying then the teacher can't force understanding.

Cheers,

FOF
Last edited by Flightoffire on Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Be Still, and Know Who You Are.
Flightoffire
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 2:03 pm

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby Rohan » Mon Apr 13, 2015 6:52 pm

Hey FOF,
there was nothing to support, everyone knows the author corrected himself about calcining philosophically(forum), at low heat, i dont need quotes to back up my theory, i did get the black stage, although you have the right to state that i am incorrect, but have you finished making the stone yourself?
I have no quotes to support my theory, I am not claiming my way is correct and solar seekers is incorrect.
How could that be, when he is one of those, whom i seek answers in private messages. :lol:
I am not claiming anyone to fully listen to boa, i am saying, use a little common sense when working with boa,
I am telling those who are using boa method, not to lose hope.
It is up to those who want the stone to decide which path to follow, I can tell anyone that, all i wanted to suggest was my method will work (Again i dont need quotes to back up my theory), lets just say, i believe in it. :)
btw,
you only get to call someone teacher, when he has acquired something, the student wants.
let me make my own mistakes, thus, let me learn
:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

cheers back
RC
Rohan
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 10:53 pm

Re: Hello, My Name Is Alchemist

Postby thrival » Tue Apr 14, 2015 1:00 am

I think from reading the many texts & authors that there's more than one way of creating a transmuting substance some call the PS, and no reason to be a 'purist' about it, unless it's directed at purifying the subject material. Some used fire, retorts and crucibles (dry way) and others lower temps (wet method.) It would seem nature has the resources to conduct both methods. Glauber said that combinations of acids would "graduate" metals being digested therein. Think about what this means; what is acting, what is being acted upon, and what is the action that's occurring? Where is the "stone?"
thrival
 
Posts: 638
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2014 9:06 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Introductions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest