Sunlight distroyer of worlds

[WIZZARD]

Sunlight, UV, radical atoms, protons, ect

Sunlight
I've had the following events take place when dealing with complex solutions of Noble Metals and sunlight exposure. Yes I'm using ore concentrate, and assay's show a good amount of Au, PGM's present, along with all the other elements that can be in ore, Cr, Ti, Fe, ect. Using HCL and non nitric oxidizer boiled, the minus 1,000 mesh ore for two hours, the filtered solutions range from yellow, orange to burgundy.

Ammonium Chloride
The solution was deluded with 4 time h2o, and added saturated ammonium chloride to the solutions, and placed in the sunlight. Text book yellow salts drop takes place in few days, next orange salts drop, next a red salts drop, then large salts a deep ruby red. The remaining solution is black with a lot of golden glitter that will not filter. When I forgo the sunlight, and just boil with ammonium chloride, the next day the salts are mixed colors, but mostly ruby red.

Sponge ignition and gold?
When the salts are ignited to PM sponge, close to end point of the sponge going gray, a brown fume begins to develop. Stopping the heat and examining the sponge residue, under the microscope , it appears to have velvet brown golden mossy looking deposit on top of the gray sponge. Not brown nitric fumes as none was used. After cooling and continuing to heat the velvet brown looks like Au micro crystals, mixed through out the gray sponge.

Question:
Has the exposure to sunlight with all those radical electrons, and protons, UV, ect, created some AuCl to be mixed with ammonium Pt/Cl salts? Hoke stated; some go for Au first while others go for the PM first? What conditions dictates, which one first? Also a science explanation of what might be going on with 5 day exposure to the sunlight, would be very helpful.


Wiz

 

[Harold_V]

Wiz,
A sore spot with me is the use of the letters ect, which mean exactly nothing. If your intention is to use the contraction of the two words et cetera, I think you'll find it is properly spelled etc., not ect., which makes no sense.

Please accept these comments in the spirit in which they have been offered. I prefer to see things spelled correctly on this forum, which often can spell the difference between success and failure.

Harold

 

[goldsilverpro]

Wizzard,

The use of Acronyms:

I totally agree with Harold. On another aspect of this, you sent me a PM or Email awhile back, which I apologize for not answering. The reason I didn't was because it was unreadable due to it being filled with acronyms and I didn't have the time to decipher it. On the forum, you keep using the acronym NM. After several days, I finally figured out that you meant non-metals. I went here and saw a list of 65 different things that NM could represent. Nonmetallics is in the list.
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/NM

You're not the only one guilty of this (but, you seem to be the worst). There are various types of electronic components that other people represent with acronyms that are unknown to me and, most probably, many others. I usually skim over these, since I could care less about the names of most of them. In your case, however, I am very interested in what you say. This interest wanes quickly, however, when I see that I will have to wade through the acronyms.

Just because certain acronyms are common to you, they aren't to many others. I must admit that I use them too (and, sometimes, I make them up), especially with long words that I don't want to type over and over in a post. When I use them, however, I always spell out the full meaning, at least once, in each and every post that I use them. For example, when using NM, you could write NM (non-metals), the first time you use it in the post.

There are certain acronyms commonly used on this forum, such as AR, SMB, and AP. Although most know what these mean, it can cause confusion for the newcomers. There should be a sticky made for these.

 

[lazersteve]

GSP,

From my deciphering of Wiz's abbreviations I believed he meant Nobel Metals = NM, but now, I'm confused too.

I agree with you and Harold, if you are going to use an abbreviation in a post, then please spell it out fully the first time it is used in the post with the abbreviation following the first full spelling.

The common ones GSP mentioned are defined in the Guided Tour Link.

Steve

 

[WIZZARD]

NM = Noble Metal http://www.yourdictionary.com/abbreviation/nm

Comments on the sunlight question?

Wiz

 

[glorycloud]

You just had three of the best mentors on the forum attempt
to give you some useful suggestions about the forum itself.
In my almost two year stay on this forum, I have seen many
people come and go. You seem to have some knowledge of
chemistry or refining I garner from your other posts. However,
a little decorum would go a long way in encouraging the moderators
and other disseminators of great and free information continue
to want to help you.

A thank you might have been nice on this thread. What I saw was
a seemingly disgruntled "where's my answer" response. Perhaps,
I am wrong. I hope so. Time will tell.

 

[butcher]

.Wiz, I just have to say the abbreviations also confuse me, your posts are interesting but hard for me to understand, you experiment with things and processes that are strange to me and you seem to talk a different language, as far as light and metals is concerned photography uses these metals and light seems to change them back to elemental metal, also oxidizers can break down in the sun, further than this I am as clueless as you. we are not picking on you we would just like to all speak the same language it makes it easier for all of us to understand each other and learn from one another


Light can act as a catalyst in some reactions.
http://docbrown.info/page03/3_31rates.htm
http://www.platinummetalsreview.com/pdf/pmr-v47-i1-002-012.pdf
this should keep you busy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_rate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet

http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/biobookps.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitric_acid

http://books.google.com/books?id=_10xWL2C7uUC&pg=PA144&lpg=PA144&dq=reactions+of+metal+salts+in+light&source=bl&ots=5cNAu1VBqs&sig=rsYC3usg6s3sk6bwoxL0DS1gm-s&hl=en&ei=I-UKTPuZM4fKNdK2mbYE&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CCIQ6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=reactions%20of%20metal%20salts%20in%20light&f=false

http://platinumvisions.com/page.aspx?pagefile=aboutPlatinum

 

[Palladium]

photosensitization : A process by which a photochemical alteration occurs in a molecular entity as a result of initial absorption of radiation by another
molecular entity called the photosensitized.

photocatalytic reactions
Photocatalytic Oxidation

 

[WIZZARD]

I'm still trying to figure out the forum, and visa versa.

Any action or reaction to my posts is direct result of learning and asking questions to experiments I've encountered. If I was short, direct or susinked you can blame it being a little concerned that hydrometallurgy on the forum is limited to recycled scrap only.

Hydrometallurgy is part of the field of extractive metallurgy involving the use of aqueous chemistry for the recovery of metals from ores, concentrates, and recycled or residual materials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrometallurgy

In the past 4 weeks a good deal of response to posts, when ore concentrate has been mentioned, caused splitting hairs, gamer, and semantics over geochemistry or scrap recycling, with a good deal of passion I might add. Ores, concentrates or residual materials are some how reduced to second class subjects.

One of the posts mentioned a section directed to mining, prospecting, and developing a category just for that. Where do you draw the line?, Once precious metal content is just as high or higher than chips, pins, and circuits components, you have the same problem. When it reaches that level, hydrometallurgy it is now to similar to part, with exception to procedures of wet chemistry. Procedures are dictated to the content of values and the content of non values, and contaminates like lead, soldier, tin and other industrial metals and their metalloid complexities can be no more or less that of rock matrix.

10 ounces of gold in 10 pounds of scrap = 10 ounces of gold.
10 ounces of gold in 10 pounds of dirt = 10 ounces of gold.

If you drop a saturated gallon of gold chloride on the ground you'll need to know how get the gold out of the dirt.

I'll work on spelling out abbreviations or acronyms like:

(SEM/EDS Scaning Electron Microscope with Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy)
http://www.sdm.buffalo.edu/scic/sem-eds.html

Thanks for information and critique. Are we refiners helping one another? I hope so.

Wiz

 

[butcher]

Wiz we do wish to help. Ore can get very complex and is a lot different than refining metals from jewelry and electronics, they are two very different animals, and yes there is overlap in processes and similarity
This is a refining forum, but we dabble in recovery and some mining, but I have to say this is not a mining forum as the info and information on this subject can also get very deep and is only touched on here, nobody is picking on you. if these guy's did not find your posts interesting they would not be reading them, they just want to understand what they are reading, this reminds me of electronics there are many fields a man can devote his life to studying in electronics, digital, radio, and so on their are many branches to that tree, each one is a field of its own and although the principles overlap they each have there own language and are actually two very different animals.

 

[Harold_V]

I'm still trying to figure out the forum, and visa versa.

Any action or reaction to my posts is direct result of learning and asking questions to experiments I've encountered. If I was short, direct or susinked you can blame it being a little concerned that hydrometallurgy on the forum is limited to recycled scrap only.

You are making a common mistake, one of confusing the recovery of precious metals with the refining of precious metals. While there may be circumstances in common, they are not one and the same, nor should we permit conversation that would encourage readers to assume they are.

I will offer, as an example, the use of cyanide for extraction. It is not selective in that it will recover silver as well as gold. Given a concentration that is too high, it will recover copper as well. Clearly, it is not a refining procedure.

Hydrometallurgy is part of the field of extractive metallurgy involving the use of aqueous chemistry for the recovery of metals from ores, concentrates, and recycled or residual materials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrometallurgy

Yes, proof that you clearly understand that we are discussing recovery, not refining.

In the past 4 weeks a good deal of response to posts, when ore concentrate has been mentioned, caused splitting hairs, gamer, and semantics over geochemistry or scrap recycling, with a good deal of passion I might add. Ores, concentrates or residual materials are some how reduced to second class subjects.

That is due, in part, to the complexity of the operation. Unlike refining, where one's options may be limited, there is an endless array of possibilities in the approach to recovering from ores. Of uppermost importance is the fact that the methods are not all inclusive. What may work well for one ore can be, and often is, a total failure for another. I learned that by my one experience with cyanide.

It's not that the information isn't worthy of consideration, just that it is well beyond the understanding of the vast majority of our readers, and unworthy of their consideration in that they will never have the need. How many people do you know that extract values from ores as a hobby? Amongst them, now many do so at a profit?

Please do remember that we are a gathering of average people, with a few exceptions, many of whom lack formal education. It is a tall order to expect a guy with no training to gain even a rudimentary understanding of the complexity of recovering values from ores, to say nothing of the lack of ability, due to the need for equipment, rarely found in the home shop.

One of the posts mentioned a section directed to mining, prospecting, and developing a category just for that. Where do you draw the line?, Once precious metal content is just as high or higher than chips, pins, and circuits components, you have the same problem. When it reaches that level, hydrometallurgy it is now to similar to part, with exception to procedures of wet chemistry. Procedures are dictated to the content of values and the content of non values, and contaminates like lead, soldier, tin and other industrial metals and their metalloid complexities can be no more or less that of rock matrix.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. To make a comparison of extracting values from any given base metal with that of an ore is a gross misunderstanding of the complexities of ores. I may not be able to describe the differences, but I know all too well that they exist. It is highly unlikely one would encounter tellurium, for example, in scrap gold, but it is not all that uncommon in ore. Consider, while you're thinking, of arsenic. It is of no concern when refining escrap, but one of our readers bordered on death because of his experiences with ores.

I'll work on spelling out abbreviations or acronyms like:

(SEM/EDS Scaning Electron Microscope with Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy)
http://www.sdm.buffalo.edu/scic/sem-eds.html

That would be a good idea in that the vast majority of us are not in tune with such an instrument, and likely don't even know what it is when you spell it out. An acronym of the unknown remains an unknown.

I have a policy. If a reader makes reading a post difficult, it is ignored, aside from my insuring that there are no prohibited expressions. I refuse to respond to a post where there is no punctuation, no capitalization, where there are gross spelling errors, where the OP is rude and demanding, where he/she appears to think that they are the center of the universe, or where they clearly lack an understanding of what is, and what is not, important in the scheme of things.

It is very important that readers keep in mind that some of us are here only to be helpful. I will use myself as a prime example. I am retired, and have been since 1994. I have absolutely NOTHING to gain by my presence on this board. I am here to provide assistance where and if I am able. I have clearly stated that I am not a chemist, nor do I have a formal education. I am short of patience with anyone that refuses to do their homework, or anyone that sits on their dime expecting others to hand to them that which took me (and others as well) years to learn and perfect. I expect that I am dealing with adults, adults that actually have a life and understand that I am generally short of time (there really is life beyond the gold forum), and try to be direct with my responses. I try to never use abusive terms, although it is difficult to expect everyone to be on the same page and accept that which has been offered in the spirit in which it was offered.

I rarely plead my case. I spell it out in clear, concise terms. If readers find that offensive, they are free to ignore my response, but I refuse to talk in such a way that I plead for their acceptance. They can profit from my years of experience, or not, but they must do so on my terms, not theirs. If they find that beyond their ability, then I'm willing to speak to them in the manner of their choosing. I'll speak to them in any way they wish, but it will come at the cost of $80/hour, with prepayment a requirement.

Thanks for information and critique. Are we refiners helping one another? I hope so.

Yes, we are. Now it's time for you to step up to the plate. Start speaking in clear and concise English. Drop the use of unknown acronyms----if you expect cooperation from readers. If they have to chase each and every acronym you use, especially when they are misspelled, you should not be surprised to find you have worn out your welcome and will be ignored by the readers. If you want to dazzle us, do it by speaking in a language that does not require a college education in order to have an understanding.

Harold

 

[Oz]

If they find that beyond their ability, then I'm willing to speak to them in the manner of their choosing. I'll speak to them in any way they wish, but it will come at the cost of $80/hour, with prepayment a requirement. Harold

I will start with picking on Harold. You under price yourself Harold. In the early 80's I got $100 an hour just fixing pinball machines and video games. Specialized to be sure in those early days of computers, but refining is way more complex. And we all know what a dollar is worth now compared to then.

I must admit that I am interested in Wizard's posts but even though I read the entire forum I find myself just scanning if it requires too much time to Google too many things and even then it may not be understood.

I have seen several posts trying to define the differences in high-graded ores and scrap electronics. I understand both arguments but ores are indeed very different than once refined scrap as to the problems that will be found with contaminating elements. For this reason I would be in favor of having a new category that deals with recoveries and refining of ores specifically. I would be interested in reading it speaking for myself, and if it has its own place it would alleviate the problem of people that will never process ores from having to read it scattered in among the rest of the posts in trying to stay current with the forum.

 

[WIZZARD]

Harold and others

Thank you for your explanation of the Forum and taking the time to address my concerns over postings made by you, my self and others regarding my questions.


Prospecting is looking for precious metal, mining is pulling pay dirt out of the earth, concentrating is physically parting the metal or it’s minerals from the dirt, and geochemistry aspect is the hydrometallurgy category that may fit in the forum’s forte.

Note; I totaled up the downloads of my photos from the Forums data page, and to date I have over 4,322 downloads of my photos in just 3 months. I hope you take this as data, indicating the interest in the area of ore, concentrates, and chemistry there of, is very high.

I suggest the Forum consider a “Geochemical” category. Not prospecting, not mining, but the chemistry of recovering precious metals from dirt. This will provide a option for all interested in their own quest for knowledge.

I have broken one of my own rules when making posts and not realizing the nature of and or intention of the basis of the forum, I made some mistakes. In the future I will make sure I fully detail my postings with disclosure of my abbreviations and acronyms.

Wiz

 

[lazersteve]

...Note; I totaled up the downloads of my photos from the Forums data page, and to date I have over 4,322 downloads of my photos in just 3 months. ...

Wiz,

You may be mistaking the number of times the image was requested as downloads. My images show nearly a hundred thousand hits each month in some cases, but I realize this does not represent the number of times a person has clicked on them, merely the number of times the image has been requested by a web page.

A good example is my animated avatar at the left of this post. My web site statistics lists it as my most frequently requested item on my site. The reason for this is because every time anyone visits the forum and one of my posts display on a web page, the image is requested.

I'm not detracting from the fact that ore processing should be a viable discussion topic here, merely that you may be basing your opinion on bad information. I am personally very interested in processing raw ores, but I also realize they are very dangerous to work with and require special attention to details that previously refined precious metals do not.

Think about this statistically, we have 11,000 + registered members, many of which are no longer with us or have multiple display names.

Steve

 

[WIZZARD]

Steve

I went to "manage attachments", then "control panel", and the images are listed under "downloads". The total was over 4,200. I'm only going by the data as it is listed. A download requires one to click on the images and save it, that is recorded in "manage attachments', to my knowledge.

Weather its hits or downloads, there is are a good number of members who have asked the same question, about adding geochemical to the forum. Educating those who haphazardly apply chemistry to ore, or geological materials may be of service to prevent them from harm.

The post made in past few days, about mixing chemicals, that was use to power rockets, is an example how the category may be more than beneficial.

The Forum can be more than a hobby, it can be a tool to prevent someone from dabbing in the unknown.
Osmium tetroxide for example:

OsO4 is highly poisonous, even at low exposure levels, and must be handled with appropriate precautions. In particular, inhalation at concentrations well below those at which a smell can be perceived can lead to pulmonary edema. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmium_tetroxide

Wiz

 

[goldsilverpro]

Why don't we just change the name of the Prospecting Category to: Prospecting, Mining, Ore Concentrates, Geochemical, Etc.? That would cover the bases and still keep it where it should be on this forum - at a level of secondary or tertiary importance. I'm the one who suggested awhile back that we add a category for ore concentrates. I've changed my mind. I don't want more than one category for anything even remotely related to mining.

I don't know about the other moderators, but I am here for one reason only - because this is a PM scrap forum. Mining related forums are a dime a dozen. For scrap, this is an oasis - it's essentially the only game in town and I don't want to dilute it. I will fight to keep it scrap centered. This isn't a democracy. It's an oligarchy. If people want "Geochemical", let them start their own website. If you want to know the effect of sunlight or cosmic energy on PMs, go to an alchemy site - maybe the one run by Tom Bearden.

 

[shyknee]

I agree with GSP .
ores ,mining cons,it is all over the place and I don't like sifting (no pun intended) through it. :|

 

[lazersteve]

Why don't we just change the name of the Prospecting Category to: Prospecting, Mining, Ore Concentrates, Geochemical, Etc.? That would cover the bases and still keep it where it should be on this forum - at a level of secondary or tertiary importance. I'm the one who suggested awhile back that we add a category for ore concentrates. I've changed my mind. I don't want more than one category for anything even remotely related to mining.

I don't know about the other moderators, but I am here for one reason only - because this is a PM scrap forum. Mining related forums are a dime a dozen. For scrap, this is an oasis - it's essentially the only game in town and I don't want to dilute it. I will fight to keep it scrap centered. This isn't a democracy. It's an oligarchy. If people want "Geochemical", let them start their own website. If you want to know the effect of sunlight or cosmic energy on PMs, go to an alchemy site - maybe the one run by Tom Bearden.

Excellent points GSP, I agree 100%.

Steve

 

[goldsilverpro]

I would like to mention that, as far as mining stuff is concerned, I think we are lucky to have Richard36 (The Rock Man) on the forum. He's knowledgeable, considerate, practical, helpful, and he understands and accepts the forum rules and philosophy. When adding the Prospector category, he's the type person I hoped we would attract. I would hate to lose him.

Wiz is right in that the term, Prospecting, is too specific. I would like to talk Noxx into re-naming the Prospector section so that it's title is more all-inclusive. Any ideas?

 

[lazersteve]

...Any ideas?

How about Prospecting, Mining, and Ore Refining ?

Steve