"M. G. Devour" wrote: > Paula writes: > > I am completely puzzled by your utter reliance on a test (salt test) > > that is so completely subjective and not at all measured, controlled, > > or precise and your attitude towards ole Bob's lab equipment and > > multiple cross checks and tests by others (real lab tests, real > > calibrated equipment, much more repeatable even if somewhat variable). > > And your reliance on calculations and equations that as far as I can > > tell from your posts do not make any allowance for any variables in > > the distilled water. You amaze me. > > Hehe. Personalities are the *fun* part of all this, dontcha know? > <GRIN> > > Seriously, Paula highlights for me the one objection Mike M. has made > to the others' efforts that I have not yet seen a solid answer to, and > I'd *like* to see that answer. > > I'm talking about his contention that some of Bob's samples show > higher silver content than is "theoretically" possible from the number > of Coulombs of electrons passed through the cell. So far the only > answer has been, "We've made hundreds of measurements and cross > checked with each other."
I can think of only two ways you could get more silver atoms in the water than the number of electrons used in the production. First if by chance we are all wrong about the silver always leaving the wire as ions. If by chance they could leave as clumps of atoms, that could explain it. The other way is if electrolysis is not being used. That is, if an arc is present, then we are not talking about electrolysis at all, but either evaporation or sputtering, both of which can remove far more silver from the electrode than the number of electrons. Marshall -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
