James, I have spoken with the Hach people way back, and we do have the sodium thiosulfate pillows at silver reagents here. But we do all our concentration analysis on an AA. Even so, I recall a conversation to the effect that "you must first digest" every sample for accuracy. But that has been disproven. If it is silver, the flame at 2300 degrees will burn it and the spectral fingerprint will not deceive you. Stephen ----- Original Message ----- From: James Osbourne, Holmes <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 11:27 PM Subject: RE: CS Makers> measurment of Ag colloid mg/L
> Hi Stephen, > > Yes, that is the issue; will the reagents either pull the atoms > one-at-a-time off the clump, or will it dissolve the clump. > > Hach tech tried digestion with Ag sol, and the results were not reliable; > without digesting, the process worked accurately and consistently. But I > still wonder. > > James Osbourne Holmes > [email protected] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Quinto [SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 2:06 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: CS Makers> measurment of Ag colloid mg/L > > 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]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
