James, If you rely upon ionizing the particles so they react with the reagents in order to get a spectrophotometer reading, then you have to completely "digest" the sample; otherwise your reading is transient, hence inconclusive. Stephen
----- Original Message ----- From: James Osbourne, Holmes <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 2:51 PM Subject: RE: CS Makers> measurment of Ag colloid mg/L > Re: Measuring the color and absorbency of sols. > "If the particle size is so small as to not transmit a color, how would a > colorimeter possibly be used to accurately determine concentration? There > is a direct contradiction here." > You react the Ag with substance(s) which create another compound in direct > proportion to the available silver, and then measure with a photodetector > how much light gets through. It is usually expressed in "absorbance", or > how much light did not get through the sample. > One is the inverse of the other, but there is a math consideration which > makes absorbance easier to work with. > The color solution---in my case, a clear magenta/purple---can be eyeballed > after some experience within a few PPM-mg/l after the color forms as the > silver is added to the prepared reagents. > In the pre-electronic age it was done by visually comparing the strength of > the color sample of the unknown with a stable prepared set of solutions in > sealed tubes representing various concentrations. > The instrument is zeroed to 100% transmission using a bleached [sodium > thiosulfate, same a photo bleach] sample of the reacted silver which is a > clear medium yellow, and the readout is set to Zero. Then a test tube or > cuvette of the colored sample replaces the "blank" and the amount of light > absorbed is read. > The measurement is made with light of a specific frequency [expressed in nM > of wavelength; i.e. color] so that you are only measuring that light > absorbed by the reaction product. > I know that I am calibrated correctly for Silver Nitrate [strongly ionized > monatomic Ag] because I can take a sample of ACS grade silver nitrate > which has been diluted precisely with class A volumetric flasks and > precision pipettes to 4.0 mg/l and the Spec reads 4.0. That is how I > created the slope on the graph with Absorbance up the X and concentration > on the Y axis, by measuring the absorbance of 6 different precise > dilutions . This forms a "curve" which is really a straight line [the > process I am using is basically linear]. I used Excell [any spreadsheet, > graphing program will probably have the same function available] to do a > linear regression on the string of points to make a best-fit straight line > for the graph. > Bob Berger gave me a great tip. Lacking a program to construct the line, > view the dots representing the individual measurements at a very low > angle, [as in placing your head very near the surface on which the paper is > laying. Your eye will 'see' the line through to dots well enough to do a > satisfactory linear regression by eyeball and brain. You then draw it in. > At issue is the reactivity of the metal particles with the color-forming > reagents. > I do not know the precision available compared with AA spectroscopy, but it > is certainly good enough with wet chemistry to determine the Ag sol > concentration to at least a tenth of a mg/L. With more sophisticated > instruments you can move the precision over to the right, but I am not sure > how far; I don't need it and could not afford it if I did. > The present issue for me is: Will the reagents I am using react fully with > the metallic particles, or, as some say, it must be reduced to ionized, > i.e. individual "dissolved" atoms of silver. Some say firmly one and others > firmly the other. > Other devices measure the amount of and wavelength of light refracted, > reflected, and absorbed with sensors at various angles to the incident > beam. They then use a complex software algorithm to calculate particle > size. > Any input based on experience or a reference regarding digestion v no > digestion will be welcome. > James Osbourne Holmes > [email protected] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: coyote [SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 8:14 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: CS Makers > > At 04:33 PM 4/5/00 +1200, you wrote: > > >>From An earlier post of mine > > > ## Thanks Ivan > > I don't plan to start an arguement, I would just like this issue to be > cleared up or at least expanded upon and open to discussion. The dogma > just doesn't correlate with my personal observations. > > Therefore, I question the dogma. [Defined as 'established pat > answers'] > > I've heard this theory endlessly repeated and worded as though it came > from the same source, yet none of my chemist friends can go beyond, "I > guess it's possible". Of course, they don't mess with CS, but you'd think > they would have at least heard of this effect in use elsewhere. I have > yet to find confirmation outside CS circles. > > > 2nd subject > > According to my Dr/PHD chemist friend, there is a newish instrument out > there that determines particle size using the Tyndal effect [another > unheard of term , at least, in the pharmeceutical research area] > > "<fontfamily><param>Arial</param>I've never heard of the Tyndal effect, > but I can tell you that our crystallographers use a "Lasex" particle size > device which is a fiber optic cable that can be put into a suspension to > determine average particle size, but only after it has been > calibrated." > > </fontfamily> > > Anyhow, please don't take offence. I don't have an ax to grind, just > some logical holes to fill. Believers can believe what they want. > > >======================== > > > > > >Ah, the question of colour never dies ;-) > > > > > >I can possibly be of help here, but let me say at the outset, > > >that all CS within the accepted colour range (clear, through > > >yellow-green, yellow and gold) exhibit very good antimicrobial > > >properties. > > ### I don't doubt that and never said that any color was "bad" or even > that whatever produces the color is not effective. I simply don't know. > > My rule is, if it looks yukky or weird, I fill a drain with it. I've > filled a lot of drains. > > > Silver nitrate is effective, no? > > If sand were mixed in with CS, the CS would still be effective...and the > sand harmless. But, neither sand or nitrates are Bredig sol pure metal > colloids. > > > > > > > >The colour of a colloid is dependant on the particle size, and > > >how that affects the reflection, refraction and extinction of > > >visible light. The smaller the particle size the smaller the > > >wavelength of light it will absorb leaving its complimentary > > >colour to be transmitted. > > > > > >Particles so small that they absorb UV light (outside the visible > > >range) transmit the full visible spectrum and look colourless. As > > >the particle size increases (by small amounts) so the wavelength > > >of the absorbed light increases, and the transmitted > > >complimentary light changes, as noted above. > > ## This begs another question. > > If the particle size is so small as to not transmit a color, how would a > colorimeter possibly be used to accurately determine concentration? > There is a direct contradiction here. > > Also, why does that color stick to the glass after storing for several > weeks leaving the suspension clear yet still potent? > > Do I have defective glass? Has anyone else noticed this? Honest, it > happens without fail, for me at least. > > > > > >Colour depth, ie the strength of a particular colour, is directly > > >proportional to the concentration of the solution (as you > > >surmise). This relationship (Beer-Lambert Law) is exploited by > > >colorimeters and spectroscopy in determining concentration of > > >solutions. > > >####I have watched unregulated batches go from clear to light yellow to > reddish to brown to deep brown to black. I have run clear batches of CS > that had various colors of deposits, stirred it up and got yellowish or > brown as a result. The yellow deposits are not easily seen unless > illuminated from below. They tend to appear under the pole that collects > silver fuzz. > > No question in my mind that depth of color indicates concentration of > "something", but what something? > > A dark color like red or blue in sufficient concentration will appear > black. A color like yellow can easily be 'swamped out' by a dark color > but whatever it is could be of a different density more easily suspended > in a liquid. > > ...so, perhaps it is uncharged silver oxide particles that clump together > into differing sizes that account for the various colors as per the > theory, whereas the silver particles produced by a constant current > should all be the same size as well as being mostly seperated by thier > charge and not tending to clump. > > > > I get a distinct feeling of seperate issues being lumped together and > called the same thing. > > :-) Ever notice the FDA doing this? To them, Bredig sol silver > colloid, mild silver protien, various silver salts and compounds > [including 'gag' silver cyanide] are all the same thing. Similarly, I > never hear of pure silver in suspensions being mentioned as being a > seperate issue from silver oxides which are near impossible to 'not' > produce in low voltage systems. > > One pole produces hydrogen that usually bubbles off. [If it doesn't > bubble off, it may trap silver ions on the bubble surface and form that > grey fur.] The other pole produces pure oxygen and it's rare to see the > oxygen bubble off. Where does it go? It instantly combines with silver > ions accounting for the black stuff. [silver oxide] If it's not all on > the rods or on the glass, where is it? There is only one other place it > can be...in the water. If colored matter is mixed in water, you get > colored water. If it has no charge to keep it suspended..... > > Other observation of tarnish on silver tells me that silver oxides can > take on several colors including all those mentioned above. Granted, > there may be numerous chemicals floating around in the air to account for > that color variation. Perhaps no relationship? > > By all indications I find it likely that, if the theory is accurate, > it's being applied to the wrong particle and make no mistake, there are > 'at least' two distinct and different molecular structures, quite easily > observable, present in low voltage CS production. Their location and > concentration varies. > > > A note on HVAC. If the electrodes are open to the atmosphere you'll get > ozone [which will oxidize silver ions even more violently than pure > oxygen], nitric acid [if there is moisture and atmospheric nitrogen > present and since the discharge is into water...moisture is present.], > hydrogen and oxygen become a part of the nitric acid. So, there will > also be some silver nitrate made. > > If the electrodes are submerged in water, they still produce ozone, > oxygen and hydrogen but little or no nitric acid. If there is no current > control, all this stuff emulsifies into a sludge which very quickly turns > black. [I have a HVAC generator that does just that in less than 4 > minutes] > > I understand that the leading HVAC unit isolates the electrodes from the > atmosphere and doesn't allow direct contact with water. A Very good idea > that probably makes very good CS. > > > > Again, please don't take it personally, but the theory seems only to > cover part of the question in a manner that implies a statement like "We > don't know how to get rid of that yellow or brown color so we're going to > find a way to say it's the greatest thing on Earth" and the rest goes > unaddressed almost as though it were swept under the carpet. > > Well, owning a new Caddy with tinted roll up windows and air > conditioning might be nice, but it doesn't make the traffic go away no > matter what the dealer tells you. > > [So much for lurking] > > k...@czen/KD'C > > > > > >Also, keep in mind that we are talking of solutions which exhibit > > >no cloudiness. A cloudy solution contains some very large > > >particles and should be filtered. > > > > > >Regards - Ivan > > > > > > > > >==================== > > > > > > > > >Being new to CS making I'm a bit confused about what appears to > > >be a contradiction. Some listers brag about the nice deep golden > > >color they get in their batches, yet others are proud of their > > >clear, no color product. Which is right? Is more color better > > >than no color at all? > > >It would seem to me that if color is due to light refraction > > >caused by silver ppm then the more color the more silver ppm. > > >Please enlighten me. > > > > > >Best regards, > > > > > >Art > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kathryn Neff" <<[email protected]> > > >To: "Colloidal Silver" <<[email protected]> > > >Sent: Tuesday, 4 April 2000 07:53 > > >Subject: CS Makers > > > > > > > > >> Have two questions... > > >> > > >> 1. Has anyone used the Silvergen machine...do you like it...does it > > >make > > >> good quality CS in your opinion...also have you used the tester that > > >is > > >> offered......you can email me privately if you wish at [email protected] > > >> > > >> 2. Am on a meditation list and they are talking about CS....they > > >know very > > >> little about it...and have been talking about buying some CS from > > >someone > > >> and the CS is "pink".....some is very very gold......I recall > > >reading on > > >> the list about the colors of CS....and what was not good CS and what > > >the > > >> colors meant....but I cannot find it.....can anyone send me a > > >message > > >> regarding this...so that I may post it to the meditation list....I > > >wish to > > >> let them know about what is good CS, but do not want to give a vague > > >> statement..... I guess there is a lot of stuff out there for sale > > >that is > > >> not good.....I make my own with a simply machine...but do not feel > > >qualified > > >> to give them advice.... > > >> > > >> Thank you, > > >> Kathy Neff > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal > silver. > > > > > >To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to: > > >[email protected] -or- [email protected] > > >with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. > > > > > >To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > >Silver-list archive: > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > >List maintainer: Mike Devour <<[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > >
