Malcolm, Mike M., Everybody, My latest theory is that there are a couple of very different things happening in the flask. As I already mentioned it seems that the -very tiny- drop of honey just about doubled the reaction rate. I did check conductivity, both for the distilled water alone, and then for the solution with the honey, and got 0.2 uS and 4.4uS respectively, for the 2.4 liter container. (Note 4.4 uS was the hot solution, maybe 60 or 70C. Once cooled to room temperature the honey solution was 2.8 uS.)
My guess is that the very slow rate of reaction without the honey is due to the poor conductivity of the silver oxide and silver hydroxide particles, while some secondary reaction starting with the honey is driving the production of the silver compound. To appearance, though to a flashlight the transparent, deep red was always there, with or without honey. But whereas without the honey I get a brown color, with the honey I believe some white is added to the brown, resulting in a kind of gray. Unlike previous production, wherein I used manual switching, this time, about five hours into it I lost the transparent red. I'm guessing this happened around 200 ppm, but I'll know for sure when I weigh the electrodes. My hope had been that the reaction would have gone on and on, then I would have a really concentrated CS, that could be greatly diluted for saturation of ceramic filters. This is a question of economic viability. At 200 ppm producing CS in this way just might be viable, whereas at 1000 ppm it would certainly be viable. Ideas anyone? On the other hand it seems that some type and amount of starter is necessary, that without this, at about seven hours there's no discernable increase in color or density of particles in solution. I had thought that some kind of constant current device would help in this, rather than using a starter, but now I'm not so sure. Somehow I've always muddled through when confronted with inexplicable results, new directions revealing themselves within a few days, maybe weeks. And it's likely that'll happen this time as well. Maybe it's just that the honey at 2.8uS gives too much conductivity. Could I start with half that amount, then perhaps expect maybe 3/4 the rate of reaction (rather than double), allowing ten or fifteen hours, rather than five? Or for saturation of ceramic filters should I go for a parallel production of silver nitrate? That's really simple, and when mixed with the clay could be formed, dried and fired, the nitrate burning off. It's just that use of AgNO3 may take a couple of months to prove out, while CS saturation is practically a given. Any ideas? Reid Malcolm Stebbins wrote: Hi Reid, I believe honey does not ionise, just dissolves. You could try a little experiment by measuring your initial conductivity without running the generator - if the two functions are separate - them add a small dollop of honey and see if you get a, change in conductivity. There's probably enough crud in the honey to produce some change but nothing like what you'll see when you add the same (small, remember!) amount of salt or baking soda. Take care, Malcolm -- 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: silver-list@eskimo.com Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com>
