url: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m61580.html
CS>Lice- TJ Garland
From: Trem
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 19:38:08
> Hi Jack,
> I'm here but don't want to beat my own drum. It's considered bad
> form by Mike.
> Thanks for doing it for me.
> Trem
Hi Trem,
Sound advise is very important to the people on this list, and you
have more experience than most. Your thoughts are always welcome.
Please forget the past. Mike rapped my knuckles hard twice, and I'm
trying to improve.
The way I see it, high ionic ppm is a very important goal to meet
emerging viral threats, and we need all the wisdom, experience, and
good judgment we can get to find out how to make stable high ppm cs
to kill these incredibly tough bugs.
I don't think 12 ga is the final answer, and I know the quality of
the dw plays a very important role. But we really don't know much
about the impurities in dw and how they affect the cs.
Some impurities in the dw seem to help push the cs past the point
where it starts making deposits on the electrodes, and allows you to
get to a higher ppm. But the very next bottle from the same
manufacturer may be quite different, and they don't seem to be able
to measure anything different between batches.
The Faraday equation is a good starting point to let us know how
much silver is liberated. Then we can measure the ppm and see how
much is lost due to plateout, black deposits, or even mini particles
that have not agglomerated to become visible.
But we may not have a universal way to measure the ppm of the
resulting solution and compare different methods. The salt test is
good for comparing two batches, but it can only give a rough
estimate of the ppm on a single sample. I posted a rough guide at
http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m61467.html
I know you sell the Hanna PWT, and I really should get one, but
calibration seems to be a bit of a problem. Nonetheless, it also is
useful to compare two batches and see which one is higher.
Now, I'm not trying to attack the parallel plate method, but did you
see the measurements Robert made? I posted them earlier at
http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m61447.html
His measurements seem to correlate well with the blue dispersion he
got in the salt test, so I'm pretty confident his measurements of
about 10 ppm are good.
But there seemed to be no deposits on the plates until the third
run. I can understand that one due to the high current density he
uses, but I have no explanation for the results on the parallel
plates.
One theory might be the plates tend to trap the silver and hydroxyl
ions, so the concentration increases between the plates. This
increases the chance the two will meet and combine to make silver
oxide. But it happens over a large volume, so maybe the particles
don't agglomerate as easily.
I think the 12 ga wire allows the ions to disperse more readily, and
allows a higher ppm. But one way to solver the dispersal problem is
with forced circulation. This would refresh the dw between the
plates and should allow higher concentration before large amounts of
oxide are produced.
I think this is the method you use on your production units. Do you
have any figures for the highest ppm you can produce, and is there
any way you could do a quick salt test to give a comparison?
Any other thoughts you may have would be very welcome.
Thanks!
Best Regards,
Mike Monett
--
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]>
