It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Turning Lead into Gold

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 11:37 PM
link   
One of the supreme quests of alchemy is to transmute lead into gold. Lead (atomic number 82) and gold (atomic number 79) are defined as elements by the number of protons they possess. Changing the element requires changing the atomic (proton) number. The number of protons cannot be altered by any chemical means. However, physics may be used to add or remove protons and thereby change one element into another. Because lead is stable, forcing it to release three protons requires a vast input of energy, such that the cost of transmuting it greatly surpasses the value of the resulting gold.
Transmutation of lead into gold isn't just theoretically possible - it has been achieved!

Source: ttp://chemistry.about.com/cs/generalchemistry/a/aa050601a.htm

Hi, I used the Search function and didn't really find any threads directly discussing this. The concept of turning lead into gold always seemed like some myth or fanciful theme to a childeren's story to me, I never really thought it was possible. However it seems that it is possible to transmute lead into gold. I'm definetly no expert or scientist. My only knowledge of metals comes from 2 years job experience in a metal fabrication shop when I was a teenager and my boss gave me some books on metalurgy, But in all honesty I don't know much about the transmuting of metals or the molecular structures of the elements; so again, I'm not claiming to be some Metalurgy or Alchemy expert. What I do knows is that it's a really interesting idea to me. The article lists only a small number cases of minute ammounts that have been successfully transmuted. So if it's possible, its enevitable that the methods will improve in time. From what I know about U.S currency is that it's supposed to be backed by gold. If gold can be made from lead then the gold could be made in aboundance, wouldn't that depreciate the value of gold and effect the value of currency?

I don't know, I think the whole 'turning lead into gold' idea is sweet though.




posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 11:49 PM
link   
So with the massive cost factor involved this is a pretty moot experiment (cool none the less)

If it were me doing it I think I'd have to go the other way and turn Gold into Lead - scientifically probably equally as difficult but it would look far funnier on the front pages of the morning papers!



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
So with the massive cost factor involved this is a pretty moot experiment


Maybe not.
I think the more that is understood about the process, the easier and less expensive it would eventually become.This definetly made me think about all the old alchemy tales in a new light.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 12:57 AM
link   
Well there is something called low energy nuclear reactions (LENR). It is a supposed basis for cold fusion
www.lenr-canr.org...

There is some speculation that the alchemists may have discovered some fairly complex processes that involved LENRs.

Also there is some evidence that transmutation occurs inside some plants.

www.cheniere.org...

Thus the universe is still a bit stranger than conventional wisdom suggests.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by cynical572
If gold can be made from lead then the gold could be made in aboundance, wouldn't that depreciate the value of gold and effect the value of currency?

I know nothing about how the economy is affected but if you made heaps of gold and stashed it, maybe it would work out ok. Excellent post though, I'm just starting to research chemistry myself. If you could develop a "cheap" way to add or remove protons and the stashing idea works, I'd say you'd make a few bucks!








[edit on 20/9/07 by NuclearPaul]



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by NuclearPaul

Originally posted by cynical572
If gold can be made from lead then the gold could be made in aboundance, wouldn't that depreciate the value of gold and effect the value of currency?

I know nothing about how the economy is affected but if you made heaps of gold and stashed it, maybe it would work out ok. Excellent post though, I'm just starting to research chemistry myself. If you could develop a "cheap" way to add or remove protons and the stashing idea works, I'd say you'd make a few bucks!

[edit on 20/9/07 by NuclearPaul]


Gold is worth quite a bit - but (here in the UK at least) we don't base our currency on gold any more.

Some would say we should of stayed on the gold standard - personally I can't really comment as most if not all of my (short!!) life has been after the change.

Gold is just another shiny metal now a days. Peoples credit ratings / dwellings / hopes / dreams now that's another matter!

Could they ever change carbon into gold?? I only ask cos if they can do that by the time I cop it I wouldn't mind my ashes being made into a nice gold watch that wont ever keep time right.


MBF

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 10:16 PM
link   
I understand that this can be done inside a nuclear reactor. That is why the cost of doing so greatly outweighs what the gold would be worth.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Well now that we know it's really possible, maybe there might be some valuable information hidden in old Alchemical texts that would be wise to research??? also; inserting a little speculation here folks: but what about the whole transmuting lead into gold thing being a "by-product" of something else, two birds with one stone kind of thing?
I'm not aware of any of the old tales of turning lead into gold mentioning a need for vast ammounts of nuclear energy, maybe there might be an easier alternative, but then again maybe not.


MBF

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 10:36 PM
link   
I, myself, don't see that a chemical reaction could change lead into gold. The reaction would have to be nuclear.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I remember reading about this. The scientists probably did it mostly just to say it had been done, since there is no practical or economic value in it, or at least in the current processes used. I don't think we have to worry about gold losing value anytime soon. Even if it did, then lead would rise in value :p

It's perfectly legitimate science, but you need millions of dollars worth of equipment to do it, and converting lead to gold costs way more than the value of the gold.

And to answer the previous poster, yes you would need a nuclear reaction, not a chemical one, to change any element into any other.

[edit on 22-9-2007 by DragonsDemesne]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 09:50 PM
link   
I've been telling people for YEARS that the old alchemists were telling the truth. It was something that was studied and practiced their entire lives, so obviously, and eventually, your gonna start to figure somethings out. Plus, there was no point in releasing these alchemical writings that "cryptically" described these formulas and processes if it was just fictional story-telling.

Now in allot of these alchemical proceses, there actaully is low level reactions going on, on such a level that the end product can be measured on a gieger counter.

Most of them were mystics, spiritually speaking, and allot of these so called mystics claim to be able to comprehend and see things at an atomic level.

Don't believe me??? See my post in the science and technolgy section of the boards here and look for the post, " Scientific proof, Monks levitated mega ton boulders?"

Also, a pair of Occult writers witnessed, spoke about, and described the Atom, several decades before it was officially scientifically proven and acredited to someone else: The book is called "Occult Chemistry: Investigations by Clairvoyant Magnification into...... by C.W. Leadbeater & A. W. Besant, " which was actually first published in 1895-1905.

I LOVE IT WHEN SCEPTICS ARE SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN WRONG !!!!!!!



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by cynical572
From what I know about U.S currency is that it's supposed to be backed by gold. If gold can be made from lead then the gold could be made in aboundance, wouldn't that depreciate the value of gold and effect the value of currency?


The US has not been on a gold standard since the mid seventies, so all else aside the dollar is safe.

tx.essortment.com...



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Even though the US currency is not backed by the gold standard. Transforming lead into gold would still have one hell of a detrimental effect on it. It would pretty near collapse the economy of most countries.

If gold were suddenly easy to come by, all jewelery would become worthless, just about. We are already able to synthetically create diamonds, so whats left on those rings other than a load of factory made crap?

The jewelery industry would take the first hit. Countries still on the gold standard would also take a large hit.
The US is an import nation. Without other countries economies alive enough to supply it, the US collapses. The US hasn't been self sufficient for a very long time.

Basically, even if we were able to create gold from lead. Doing so, and letting people know you can do it, would be a horrible decision to make.


[Edit]
There are reasons why certain technologies are repressed.

[edit on 22-9-2007 by johnsky]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Case in point!!!! Perhaps that is the reason why so much is kept from the public by the Governments of this world. Imagine all the secrets hidden from us, the technology, the advances are probably tremendous.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join