Alchemy-What should i study?

[koji8123]

I plan to study after im through college, Alchemy. Where should i begin? ive already done research about famous alchemists such as Nicholas Flamel. I'm interested in the power of transmutation and Quintessence. I know Alchemy just sounds like science in magic but, cant stop myself from liking it so much!

[CraigD]

I plan to study after im through college, Alchemy. Where should i begin? ive already done research about famous alchemists such as Nicholas Flamel. I'm interested in the power of transmutation and Quintessence. I know Alchemy just sounds like science in magic but, cant stop myself from liking it so much!

I can think of several approaches to the study of Alchemy, all of which you can not only pursue independently, but for academic credit as an undergraduate or graduate college student.

 

One is through the discipline of History. People calling themselves alchemists, esoteric brothers, etc., actually lived. Many of them were charismatic and influential, exerting significant influence not only on other alchemists, but in other fields, and on various political movements and leaders (eg: Isaac Newton). The methods of history allow you to distinguish mythologized accounts of the lives of alchemists – and in some cases, whether a specific individual ever existed, or was a composite of several real people – from what really occurred (eg: Hermes Trismegistus).

 

Another is through the study of Psychology, Anthropology, and similar fields, and the history of these fields. Several late 19th to mid 20th century psychologists and anthropologists (eg: Carl Jung) incorporated the symbolism and in some cases the practice of Alchemy into their theories of personality, interaction, mind, etc. I managed to get 3 credits out of an independent study of Jung – though it consumed practically an entire summer, as I ended up reading through his collected works!

 

Another is through literature. References to Alchemy, from many perspectives and levels of credulity, abound in works of fiction recent and old, particularly the alternate history genre (eg: Gregory Keyes’s “The Age of Unreason” series and Neil Stephenson’s “The Baroque Cycle”).

 

The last is as one of several scientific disciplines. Here, it’s necessary to get some sort of concrete definition of what Alchemy actually was/is. To the best of my knowledge, it splits fairly cleanly into two related but disparate subjects: physical transmutation; and biological immortality.

 

Scientifically, nuclear transmutation of the elements isn’t too difficult – somewhat as a publicity stunt, Glenn Seaborg transmuted a small amount of bismuth (atomic number 83, vs. 82 for lead) into gold (atomic number 79), and rumor has it that a large amount (tens of kg) of lead were once accidentally transmuted into gold in a Soviet research facility, discovered only when a detector was dismantled to make room to build a new one!

 

The study of biological and other forms of immortality are so numerous and varied that a new terms and social movements have grown up around it in recent decades (eg: Extropianism). Though my usual work is far from the subject, I consider myself an extropian.

 

The only caution I’ll offer is advice to be wary of many academic humanities departments (Psych, Anthro, etc.), as some have some faculty and students who are hostile to and ignorant of basic science. My personal rule is if someone describes him or herself as a postmodernist, I approach them trepidly.

[Mercedes Benzene]

One of the best approaches to alchemy, in my opinion, is to study nuclear transmutation. I would say that most physics and/or chemistry departments at universities offer courses on nuclear chemistry. Or you can always just pick up a book for independent study.

This is real, live, alchemy at work!

[koji8123]

radiation is near transmuting but inst there a way to shoot protons at other protons hard enough to force its change to a different element? like shoot 1 Hydrogen atom to another and now you get Helium?

[modest]

radiation is near transmuting but inst there a way to shoot protons at other protons hard enough to force its change to a different element? like shoot 1 Hydrogen atom to another and now you get Helium?

 

Yes koji,

 

Such is nuclear fusion. If enough energy is applied toward forcing two nuclei together, the electrostatic force that repels the two nuclei can be overcome allowing the shorter range nuclear force to bind them. I'd recommend the link above which describes this in detail along with the energy requirements and applications. Also, if you haven't looked at it yet, CraigD's link above on transmutation should be very good reading for anyone interested in alchemy.

 

~modest

[koji8123]

So with nuclear fusion, making lead into gold is possible, not just myth?

[Overdog]

So with nuclear fusion, making lead into gold is possible, not just myth?

Yes, it is possible...that's how gold got created in the first place (in exploding stars). But whether we can do it, I do not know. I suspect we can, but I also suspect that the cost of doing it is far greater than the value of the gold we could produce.

[CraigD]

So with nuclear fusion, making lead into gold is possible, not just myth?

Lead has 82 protons and 126 neutrons, gold 79 and 118 (the most common isotopes of each, that is), so you actually have to slightly fission lead to transmute it into gold, but yes, it is possible.

 

Somehow, you have to ultimately remove 3 protons and 8 neutrons. The best way to do it isn’t necessarily straightforward. For example, Glenn Seaborg’s famous 1980 transmutation went from bismuth, with 83 protons and 126 neutrons, which you can transmute lead into by adding 1 proton.

 

In every case I’ve read about, these transmutations are much more expensive than the value of the gold they produce, making them more or less “stunts”. The main practical application appears to be the transmutation of nuclear wastes to make their disposal less dangerous and costly. Though not commercially practical, making synthetic elements and isotopes nuclear transmutation is very valuable to science – it’s practically the only way to test many of the theories of nuclear physics.

[HydrogenBond]

The alchemists were the first chemists. They didn't have the background we have today. But they were good empiricists able to isolate and identify a wide range of atoms, compounds and reactions. They also develop many chemical lab techniques like distillation, extraction, etc. Without having a solid basis to explain things, they correlated the observational data in an odd way by modern standards. But they could use this correlation to predict and catalogue many chemical affects.

 

Relative to the alchemists, because they didn't understand atoms like we know today, the great unknown was filled in by the imagination. Turning lead into gold was symbolic of an inner transformation. Gold has always been the ideal metal due to color and chemical resistance. The lack of oxidation to the alchemists meant is was not corruptible. It represented the perfect human who was above the petty. Lead is corruptible so it was more like the weakness of humanity wallowing in the mire. Their goal was to turn the imperfect into the perfect. This is how they reasoned chemistry.

 

Once I had a project to create best available technology for removing mercury from water. The science wasn't there until I invented it. I used alchemy symbolism to see how the alchemist would approach it since mercury was a very central symbol. It was a hobby so I was familiar with their symbols. Mercury was the mercurial serpent, like the devil. I had to trap the devil. To them like attracts like since they were projecting human nature. One chemical the devil would like is sulphur since this smells like the fires of hell. Mercury sulfide turns out to be one of the most insoluble substances in nature. This sort of worked but the mercury sulfide was too fine to filter down to parts per trillion, unless I used reverse osmosis. This would have practical problems in the field.

 

I need to figure how to attract and contain the mercury sulfide. I used iron. Iron is connected to the good of war and war is hell. I could have used copper which was venus and desire. But desire is not as hellish as war, but can be fun and positive. To keep this all these hellish elements contained in a trap I needed the power of the good side. This sounds funny but this is an example of alchemy logic.

 

When I put it all together, I started with an anion exchange resin load with positive charge (good) to attract anions. This was my trap. I used that to attract sulfide anions to make a modified cation exchange resin. I reacted that with Ferric chloride to stick iron III ions to the sulfide. Now I had the hellish bait for the devil. When mercury touches this there is a chemical reaction that captures the mercury and sticks to the trapped sulfide. I was able to trap the mercurial serpent down to below 100 part per trillion.

 

Besides the anion exchange resin, the alchemists could have done this. I remember presenting this alchemy logic in a technical report since I wanted to give the alchemists some credit. It worked, so I was cut some slack. After that I was playfully called the mercury man. It only took two weeks to invent and was used to treat 2M gallons of water. The alchemy logic helped to narrow it down the experiments. I just modernize it.