# what happens if you boil gold/platinum chloride?



## NickPerry (Apr 26, 2014)

*The text below is a QUESTION, nothing read here should EVER be tried at home, no matter how good/safe you think you are! experimenting with chemicals is always a hazard, and the fact that this could produce chlorine gas makes that even more true see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapons_in_World_War_I*


I was just doing some reading, and came across azeotropic distillation, which if my understanding is correct is a much more accurate way of separating 2 liquids with a different boiling point.

I thought to myself 'hey, people are always looking for ways to separate out the different metals they dissolved in aqua regia. I wonder if this will be able to do that (though I already had a hunch that it couldn't since I've never heard of anyone doing it before)

so, I did some more research, and if I'm correct, metals devolved in HCL/aqua regia form chlorate's. so I Wikipedia'd the boiling temperature of platinum & gold chloride. 
and I found that they decompose instead of boil (though no indication at what temperature they decompose at)

since those chloride's only consist of 2 elements, I'm taking a hazard guess that when it decomposes it forms gold/platinum crystals + chlorine gas (you know, the stuff that killed thousands of people in WW1)

hypothetically speaking (no, I would not try this, and anyone who does experiment with this, shouldn't)

could you 'boil' (decompose?) the chlorine from the chlorate solution, and bubble it through water to bond with the hydrogen in the water, releasing the oxygen, forming clean hydrochloric acid again, and leaving you with your extracted metals, ready to be melted.

or if chlorine doesn't have the bonding power to pull off the oxygen, could you feed the gas through a beaker of hydrogen gas (fed to it via an electrolysis bubble) let them bond together to form hydrogen chloride, and then pass it through distilled water to form HCL.

*afterthought after I typed this: would urea neutralize the chlorine? (I just remember that in WW1 they used urine soaked rags as a gas mask)

I'm asking this purely to see if my understanding of chemistry is correct. I have no death wish, and since bubbling through a liquid only transfers a small portion of the chemical, I would still be left with a chlorine gas cloud, respirator/fume hood or not. that's not a good thing by any means.
I'm just curious.

Thank you in advance, and if moderators feel this question might post to much of a hazard, despite the warnings I added, you have my permission to remove this post.


----------



## butcher (Apr 27, 2014)

It does not or will not work that way.
There are so many things wrong with it That I do not know where to begin, except to say keep studying You will get it.


----------



## goldsilverpro (Apr 27, 2014)

Like I say in my signature, "A pocket full of theory and $3 will buy you a cup of coffee almost anywhere." These published figures are based on isolated perfect systems, which never seem to exactly occur on a practical basis. They are only good as a basic guide.


----------



## solar_plasma (Apr 27, 2014)

Okay, the teacher in me feels the need to comment this, too. I hope this is okay.

1) *sigh* Listen to Butcher.
2) We need to talk the same language. All the terms you are using, do have an exact meaning. Chlorates (ClO3-) are strong oxidizers, chlorides (Cl-) are something else. Ignoring those differences, you will put yourself away sooner or later. 
3) Wikipedia is a very nice thing to fastly get some shallow information, but the processes and reactions are described more than incompletely. You might use it to understand a single unknown word you read in a proper chemistry book, in the forum or in Hoke. It is not the source where you gain knowlegde to perform any processes safely.
4) You don't need a lot of chemical knowlegde to become a refiner, that is why Hoke didn't base her book on chemical equations, but on techniques.
5) If you want to talk chemistry with us in the way you tried above, it would be a better idea find a school book, start with the first lesson and I will gladly help you understand, if you have a question. 

At last I would like to thank you, because what you wrote, let me realize, how some of my questions, I have posted on the forum, probably feel to the real chemists, physicists and engineers.


----------



## NickPerry (Apr 27, 2014)

*butcher*

perhaps you can tell me anything that's correct then instead?
but I will of course keep reading.

Thank you for your reply!

* goldsilverpro*

I'm fine with 'only works in a perfect/enclosed environment, since I'm only doing this as a mental exercise, and my hypothisis that I posted was based off of several sources, not one guide :s

but thank you for your input!


*solar_plasma*



> 1) *sigh* Listen to Butcher.



I listen to all of you guys. (doesn't mean I won't ask questions about what you guy say though..)
but when I do ask questions, it's because I want to understand you guys better, not because I think i know better (because I know I do not )



> 2) We need to talk the same language. All the terms you are using, do have an exact meaning. Chlorates (ClO3-) are strong oxidizers, chlorides (Cl-) are something else. Ignoring those differences, you will put yourself away sooner or later.



oh! I didn't know that, i thought.. well, I thought wrong . Thank you for the clarification! i actually did try my best to use the correct words for everything, so thank you for your correction!



> 3) Wikipedia is a very nice thing to fastly get some shallow information, but the processes and reactions are described more than incompletely. You might use it to understand a single unknown word you read in a proper chemistry book, in the forum or in Hoke. It is not the source where you gain knowlegde to perform any processes safely.



I only used the wiki in this case to find out what temperature things boil at (the wiki usually is pretty accurate in that) i used other sources straight from education institutions+60 symbols(youtube) for the rest of it.



> 4) You don't need a lot of chemical knowlegde to become a refiner, that is why Hoke didn't base her book on chemical equations, but on techniques.



that's why I'll be using hoke & similar for my actual refining process. but I'm the type of person that always craves the 'why?' and the 'how come's?' when i do anything, which is why I'm trying to figure this stuff out.

but rather then spitting out direct questions about stuff, i find i learn better if I take everything I think I know (based off reading & observation) and then form an hypothesis. Normally i would then do an experiment to see if it works or didn't work (like with programming/ electronics/ construction/ physics/whatever) but with chemistry I'm kind of afraid to do any experimentation beyond tried and true methods because it seems like any deviation from the given method will lead to death/cancer/etc.



> If you want to talk chemistry with us in the way you tried above, it would be a better idea find a school book, start with the first lesson and I will gladly help you understand, if you have a question.



where do you think this stuff stems from?  this particular case is basically from me reading an introduction to chemistry, and talking about the differences between Ionic & Covalent bonds, which gave me idea's, and I started reading up on those Idea's, which gave me more Idea's, which gave me even more idea's. and now I'm here.. and yeah, I probably should go back to the textbook again. (I guess this is why I've been diagnosed with ADHD )



> At last I would like to thank you, because what you wrote, let me realize, how some of my questions, I have posted on the forum, probably feel to the real chemists, physicists and engineers.



oh, you're quite welcome 

and as always, thank you so much for your insight! :mrgreen:


----------



## solar_plasma (Apr 27, 2014)

> up on those Idea's, which gave me more Idea's, which gave me even more idea's. and now I'm here.. and yeah, I probably should go back to the textbook again. (I guess this is why I've been diagnosed with ADHD )



Obviously you have learned to use your adhd as strengths and you are able to handle its weaknesses. Though I probably can't follow all your thoughts and parallelic thoughts crossover the whole science, I even don't know, if you yourself can, since I as a non-adhs-affected person am focussing only on few subjectively relevant matters, I will gladly help you, if I can, when you have school chemistry relevant questions. I am really curious, how you will evolve over time in this subject of refining and chemistry.


----------



## NickPerry (Apr 27, 2014)

*solar_plasma*



> Obviously you have learned to use your adhd as strengths and you are able to handle its weaknesses



I try. gotta make the best with what your given, or else you're never going to achieve your full potential ! but thank you. that's actually a huge compliment 



> I even don't know, if you yourself can



lol, there's tons of times I'll start off thinking one thing, and end up somewhere completely different with no clue how I got there. keeps things interesting though!



> I will gladly help you, if I can, when you have school chemistry relevant questions. I am really curious, how you will evolve over time in this subject of refining and chemistry.



I'm truly glad for the help! and I'm curious too! and there's only one way to find out where this path will lead me, and that's to walk down it.
(I suppose I could read the signs posted on the path, but where's the fun in that?) :mrgreen:


----------



## solar_plasma (Apr 27, 2014)

> Reading = knowledge
> knowledge = power
> power corrupts.
> corruption is a crime.
> ...



*Faust* by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Scene I: Night
(In a high-vaulted Gothic chamber, Faust, in a chair at his desk, restless.)

Ah! Now I’ve done Philosophy,
I’ve finished Law and Medicine, 
And sadly even Theology:
Taken fierce pains, from end to end.
Now here I am, a fool for sure!
No wiser than I was before:
Master, Doctor’s what they call me, 
And I’ve been ten years, already,
Crosswise, arcing, to and fro,
Leading my students by the nose,
And see that we can know - nothing!
It almost sets my heart burning. 
I’m cleverer than all these teachers,
Doctors, Masters, scribes, preachers:
I’m not plagued by doubt or scruple,
Scared by neither Hell nor Devil –
Instead all Joy is snatched away, 
What’s worth knowing, I can’t say,
I can’t say what I should teach
To make men better or convert each.
And then I’ve neither goods nor gold,
No worldly honour, or splendour hold: 
Not even a dog would play this part!
So I’ve given myself to Magic art,
To see if, through Spirit powers and lips,
I might have all secrets at my fingertips.
And no longer, with rancid sweat, so, 
Still have to speak what I cannot know:
That I may understand whatever
Binds the world’s innermost core together,


----------



## NickPerry (Apr 27, 2014)

solar_plasma said:


> That I may understand whatever
> Binds the world’s innermost core together,



Gravity? 

joking aside. that a wicked piece of poetry. best I've read in years actually.

*edited to remove emoticon


----------



## jimdoc (Apr 28, 2014)

NickPerry said:


> Gravity?
> joking aside. that a wicked piece of poetry. best I've read in years actually.




Texting lingo is not permitted on this forum. If you feel the need to add p) to every post you will wear out your welcome. 
And if it is a broken emotocon or whatever you call them, then please just stop using it.

Jim


----------



## NickPerry (Apr 28, 2014)

jimdoc said:


> NickPerry said:
> 
> 
> > Gravity?
> ...




my apologies, I had asked about them earlier, with no reply. and since no one complained about my use of emoticons + the fact that they are available (and some are pre-broken) in the right-hand column of the reply text editor I assumed them to be ok, and that 'texting lino' meant abbreviations of common words, not emoticons.
but I'll try to refrain from using them. 

sorry again.


----------



## jimdoc (Apr 28, 2014)

Thank You.

Jim


----------



## butcher (Apr 28, 2014)

I was just doing some reading, and came across azeotropic distillation, which if my understanding is correct is a much more accurate way of separating 2 liquids with a different boiling point.

True we can distill one liquid as a gas from a solution or mixture of two liquids; the more volatile liquid will distill off.
But much here depends on the mixture of liquids we are talking about, solubility, volatility of the components involved, temperatures, vapor pressures, and other factors.
The statement is basically true.
But without discussing a particular substance, or process, and by adding this statement in with the other statements that followed this one (which I see little relevance to), it basically does not make much sense to me.
All you have is a true statement, that works for some substances depending on what they are and their properties and the procedure use in distilling them, there is more to it than this one statement.

I thought to myself 'hey, people are always looking for ways to separate out the different metals they dissolved in aqua regia. I wonder if this will be able to do that (though I already had a hunch that it couldn't since I've never heard of anyone doing it before)

Because it does not work that way, if you distilled off the liquid as gases of the metals, you would end up with a mixture of metal salts; you would not be separating metals from each other.

There are reasons why recovery and refining are done in certain ways, for thousands of years man has studied and researched this subject, tried most everything imaginable to develop methods that work, millions of attempts to reinvent the wheel and millions of failures prove that the best wheel is still the round one.
Why waste time where millions of others have?
Learning the procedures known to work and work well, is hard enough, but to waste your time trying to invent a better wheel which will most likely lead to a million more failures, especially before you even lean how the real wheel works make no sense at all, like walking blindfolded into a snakes den it is not likely to turn out good.
Learn how the wheel works first, and maybe you may find some small improvement.

so, I did some more research, and if I'm correct, metals devolved in HCL/aqua regia form chlorate's. so I Wikipedia'd the boiling temperature of platinum & gold chloride. 
and I found that they decompose instead of boil (though no indication at what temperature they decompose at)

You mean dissolved in HCl (not HCL there is no such acid), or aqua regia.
These metals form chlorides (not chlorates) when dissolved in aqua regia.
These metals form chloride salts in aqua regia, if you evaporated them (boiling would lead to losses of values), you can drive off free acids as gases, to form a mixture of gold and platinum salts (or a mixture of any metal involved that formed a chloride in the mixture, as long as it was not volatile, basically no separation,. heating these chloride salts will drive off the chloride as gas, heating too high of a temperature you can also have loses of gold platinum or other metals involved , which depends on the volatility and temperature used, the salts will decompose to form metal powders, depending on the metal involved, many base metals will form oxides because of their reactivity to oxygen at these higher temperatures…

since those chloride's only consist of 2 elements, I'm taking a hazard guess that when it decomposes it forms gold/platinum crystals + chlorine gas (you know, the stuff that killed thousands of people in WW1)

Aqua regia forms many toxic gases when reacting with metals, or when heated.

could you 'boil' (decompose?) the chlorine from the chlorate solution, and bubble it through water to bond with the hydrogen in the water, releasing the oxygen, forming clean hydrochloric acid again, and leaving you with your extracted metals, ready to be melted.

Again these are chloride not chlorates, yes you can capture some of the gases which will react with water to form acids, aqua regia is a mixture of water and acids, which forms several gases (not just HCl) depending at what stage of the process, and many other factors would depend what the distillate would be composed of, it is not one acid or gas, just not as simple as you make it sound…

You could recover the metal powders if done properly drive off the chloride slowly and melt them to metal, but what did you gain, you have just wasted your time, energy, money, supplies, and have a lump of the same mixture of metals you started with, even if you do not lose some metals in the process.

We could try to go into more detail on this, but for me it would be a waste of my time better spent.

Keep studying, you have only touched the edge of an very big and deep ocean, you have discovered it is wet, but you really have not even begun to discover or understand it mystery’s, or principles or what is in the deep of it.

Concentrate on learning how ships are built and how to sail them properly before trying to build a new ship and sail it across that ocean, that wet water is deep, and cold, and full of mystery, much of you which you could miss by just swimming around no where.

Keep studying, you are touching on some good topics, and seeing the water is wet, keep studying the proper methods, you will soon learn to use what you are learning to your advantage, forget about trying to re-invent the ship before you learn how they are made and sailed, this way you will gain a better knowledge of the ships and the ocean you have just discovered, and have a much better learning experience,to discover what is actually out there.


----------



## NickPerry (Apr 29, 2014)

*WOW!* seriously, wow!

Thank you so much, that was super helpful, thank you for taking the time to write that up!
I learned quite a bit from that.



> We could try to go into more detail on this, but for me it would be a waste of my time better spent



You have already done more then enough. your a good person.

I'll keep studying, of course.

and next time when I post something, I'll try to keep it as one Idea at a time, so that it's easier for you guys to answer.

Thank you so much again!

(sorry for the late reply though, I was busy)


----------



## butcher (Apr 30, 2014)

Nick,
Yes it is much easier to respond to one thing at a time, or learn one thing at a time.

I think if you spend some time on the forum and study, I do believe you will do very well at this, you seem to gravitate to very important topics, and points, which can be very important, if you spend some more time studying these, You will go far in this study and art, and learn to apply better what you learn.
Try not to jump around too much, slow down and smell the roses.
Try not to just run over them.


----------

