Dear Ken, I don't wish to make you seem anything you are not. I have responded to your words using the language required to explain the concepts you raise. Standard scientific terms and definitions are required in this regard, but I have tried to be as straight forward and brief as possible, and I do not believe I have used irrelevant technical jargon. If I have I apologise.
I am happy to continue the discussion as time permits, but suggest that you study a basic general science text to familiarise yourself with the standard terminology and processes. To answers some of the points you raise: > Youu seem to deny the presence of oxides when my eyes can clearly see they > exist. What do you see, and how do you know they are oxides? > The use of 'oxidation' referring to charge relates to 'oxidation > potential' not oxidation defined as combining with oxygen. So, I'm confused > by what you say when you use that term. It seems a different way of looking > at the same thing in reverse. All chemical reactions are Redox reactions (reduction/oxidation). Oxidation is that part of the reaction where electrons are removed from a substance which is then said to be oxidised and has become more positive. Reduction is that part of the reaction where a substance gains electrons, the substance is then said to be reduced and has a 'reduced' positive charge. Oxidation by oxygen is a small subset of all oxidation reactions, and indeed oxygen will itself be oxidised by fluorine. An oxide is a compound just like a chloride, fluoride, hydride, hydroxide, sulphide etc.etc. and has formed in exactly the same way as these others, that is, via a redox reaction. > *Again, one does not need to assume the presence of silver oxide for > this to be true. > "Hydrogen peroxide removes this deposit, because it is elemental silver, > and so is able to supply an electron to the bound O(-1) ion > ### What is the bound ion O (-1) bound to? If it is bound to something > other than Oxygen, isn't it reasonable to assume an oxide compound? I'm sorry I wasn't clear. It is bound to the water molecule creating H2O2 which could be called 'water oxide' or 'dihydrogen dioxide', a substance hungry for electrons. > In doing so it has disassociated the metalic > silver by oxidation (removed electrons) and formed Ag+ ions which can > then be measured." ## Disassociated the metalic silver from what? The metallic silver has disassociated, ie come apart, broken into its constituent bits. > When the results of an (ISE) reading of > coloured CS (as produced by myself, others may have elemental particle > inclusion) is compared to the Atomic Absorption (AA) test result > (which measures total silver content, regardless of ionic nature or > compound) the results match to within the margin of error! ### Of course it > does. It doesn't take oxygen bound to silver as anything different than > total silver content. The silver didn't go away just because it caught or > lost some oxygen. The atomic absortion test is "Atomic Absorption > Spectronomy" [looked it up] where the tested substance is vaporized , > usually, in a flame. > > How do these test confirm or deny existance of oxides?## As the test results of the same sample show equal concentration both for silver ion content (ISE) and for total silver content (AA), then the total silver content must exist as ions and not as a compound of silver, which is not measurable by the ISE method. If some of the total silver content existed as oxides, then the concentration as measured by the AA would be higher than the ionic measurement. Hope this helps. Ivan. ----- Original Message ----- From: "coyote" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, 11 April 2000 03:51 Subject: Re: CS>long and winding oxides and how to make strong clear LVDC CS > ## I don't mind. > Your use of some terms confuses me and makes me look things up. This is good. > Youu seem to deny the presence of oxides when my eyes can clearly see they > exist. > The use of 'oxidation' referring to charge relates to 'oxidation > potential' not oxidation defined as combining with oxygen. So, I'm confused > by what you say when you use that term. It seems a different way of looking > at the same thing in reverse. > Confusion over anode/cathode/positive and negative charges comes from > being taught electronics theory both ways at once. [electron theory/hole > theory] I can no longer bias a transistor and understand what I did. > OK, so now I know what you 'mean' to say [maybe] and I'll try to fit it in. > I am attempting to understand what I am seeing in an environment that I > know little about. You seem intent on steering me away from my own > perceptions with irrelevent technicaleese mixed with the relevent and > designed to make me look like an idiot. Well, I AM an idiot, so it doesn't > matter to me how I look. > > Really now, I appreciate the effort you've put into explaining what you > believe to be true and have gotten a great deal of enlightment from it. > I'm not saying what you believe is not true but it doesn't 'completely' > match what I see happening. Partially true helps too. Obviously, there are > some elements missing and a mystery existing. I say what I 'think' they are > as an attempt to communicate that there is a question, not to show off what > I know. If I 'Knew' I wouldn't bother, but I don't automatically believe > everything I'm told and stop looking either. > I'll look where ever they might be. We both think what we want to. That's > natural. I think I'm making mistakes. The only question is which is which. > That how learning happens. > That makes me an idiot AND a pain in the rump. > You may dismiss me as such and stop responding or continue and put up with > your ideas of my ignorance. It's OK either way. > > Language is the greatest barrier to communication. > Thank you for your time and efforts. The results are not yours to determine. > > Now, something here bothers me and seems incomplete. > > *Again, one does not need to assume the presence of silver oxide for > this to be true. > "Hydrogen peroxide removes this deposit, because it is elemental silver, > and so is able to supply an electron to the bound O(-1) ion > ### What is the bound ion O (-1) bound to? If it is bound to something > other than Oxygen, isn't it reasonable to assume an oxide compound? > > so that it > may become O(-2) ion (which is oxygens most stable ion), which then > combine to form O2(gas). ## Understood > > In doing so it has disassociated the metalic > silver by oxidation (removed electrons) and formed Ag+ ions which can > then be measured." ## Disassociated the metalic silver from what? > > *Molecules do not 'have' pigments, their colour depends soley on the > reflection, refraction, absorption and emmitance of light.### No problem > with that in that I suppose that pigments are molecules that reflect and > absorb light. > > This is > directly related to the particle size as proved in previous posts. > YOU are no longer talking about pure silver ion clusters, as if that > is a fact! ## Actually stated as a supposition with the 'as if' being an > accurate statement. > > Look at carbon... Carbon black is a powdery substance which absorbs > light with no reflectance or emission in the visible spectrum, hence > it looks black. However sugar, which is a large molecule containing > many carbon atoms, when dissolved in water is colourless. > ## Yes yes, diamonds and coal. > > *The fact that you can't 'see' the cloud does not mean the reaction > has stopped, it just means the particles involved are too small to > see.## What I see is silver being locked up inside hydrogen bubbles, > therefore, not in the water. True, maybe not ALL of them. When the bubbles > break up after removing power, I see the characteristic white cloud burst > forth. > > *Further proof that what I have said is true... that there is little > if any silver oxide in coloured solutions, can be found in the fact > that my Ion Selective Electrode test equipement measures the activity > of silver ions only.### Charged silver particles or ions, But not oxides? > > It does not measure the activity of any other ion > (except sulphide) or compound.## only silver ions,no compounds... OK > When the results of an (ISE) reading of > coloured CS (as produced by myself, others may have elemental particle > inclusion) is compared to the Atomic Absorption (AA) test result > (which measures total silver content, regardless of ionic nature or > compound) the results match to within the margin of error! ### Of course it > does. It doesn't take oxygen bound to silver as anything different than > total silver content. The silver didn't go away just because it caught or > lost some oxygen. The atomic absortion test is "Atomic Absorption > Spectronomy" [looked it up] where the tested substance is vaporized , > usually, in a flame. > > How do these test confirm or deny existance of oxides?## > > > At 11:27 AM 4/10/00 +1200, you wrote: > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "coyote" <[email protected]> > >To: <[email protected]> > >Sent: Monday, 10 April 2000 03:17 > >Subject: CS>long and winding oxides and how to make strong clear LVDC > >CS > > > >Dear Ken, > > > >I hope you don't mind me saying this, but you seem to display the very > >same adherence to dogma that you suspect others of, that is, clinging > >to a belief either through ignorance or bloody mindedness. > > > >How can we have a serious discussion if you do not know the meaning of > >the terms you use! > > > [snipped and displaced] > > Make your own pure clear Colloidal Silver with a current controlled, "auto > off" generator, for pennies a gallon. > > http://www.silverpuppy.com > > > -- > 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]> >
