CS>CS ppm ( EC and ppm )

[Wayne Fugitt]

Evening Jim,

>>  At 12:43 PM 7/4/2008, you wrote:

Dear Wayne:
 >> As I have said, no ppm meter exists in the world today.  Just because 
many people use the EC meter and call the results ppm metes does not  a 
ppm meter exist.


Actually there are at least two scientific instruments that directly 
measure silver concentration.  One is a probe similar to a pH probe that 
specifically measures silver concentration.  The other is a photo 
spectrometer.  Neither one is cheap.   I have been to Frank Key's lab 
several times and the device he uses burns the silver sample in a plasma 
then measures the frequency spectrum emitted and the magnatude in relation 
to a certified standard.

   Interesting indeed.

I made the statement that some high priced instruments exist that will 
measure a single salt.

Possibly these fancy devices would be covered by that.

I am not the only person that says this about ppm meters, many others have 
said the same thing.





It just so happens that the collidal silver made by my generator shows 
that uS is a 1 to 1 realation to PPM using the Hanna PWT tester.  Other EC 
meters probably will be different.  See the test report at


  How did you manage that ?  Looks like that would depend on the water as 
much as the CS.
http://meissnerresearch.com/products/silver-generator 
.


   Maybe I should have said, no Standard ppm  meter
or..   No off the shelf ppm meter, that one could afford and use exists.

The EC meters that are showing ppm have internal calculations much like the 
people on the list are using.


Back to your original statement,

>> Actually there are at least two scientific instruments that directly 
measure silver concentration.


I am fully aware that any machine, device or instrument can be designed and 
built to

accomplish virtually any purpose or virtually any task.

And,   I have no doubt that every think you say is  100 % correct.

My only slight difference and problem is that one would consider these 
highly sophisticated instruments, costing many thousands of dollars to be a 
ppm meter.

They appear to be a single purpose instrument.

I don't think you even said that they were ppm meters.  

It disturbs me that the instrument industry is talking about combining EC 
and ppm

 and having only one unit.  Not sure what they could call it.

I believe that many would never accept it. ppm is an absolute.  EC is also, 
but they are not the same thing, and never will be.  In rare cases, pure 
water and one item, and they will be close, as you stated.


Wayne

Re: CS>High Tech Repellant System

[Starshar]

From: "M. G. Devour" 

>> They picked up the chlorine tabs, and the mothballs, and literally threw
>> them back out the holes!
> 
> Which turns this into an engineering problem... How 'bout putting those 
> kinds of things in a sturdy metal container with holes in it and 
> anchoring it under there on a chain or a pole? If they can't get at it 
> to move it, they might decide not to live with it.
> 
> Of course, if you *do* get them to move, you might want to take a look 
> around first and think about where they might decide to move *TO!*


Exactly! There are too many temptations available already.

I do like your "engineering solution" though; very creative.

Sharon,
grateful that the problem is not snakes, scorpions, etc


--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.

Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org

To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com

Address Off-Topic messages to: silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com

The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down...

List maintainer: Mike Devour 

Re: CS>[List Owner] Topic control...

[Wayne Fugitt]

Evening Mike,

>> at 07:45 AM 7/4/2008, you wrote:

Hi folks! Hope those of you in the 'states are enjoying a nice 4th of
July weekend!

   Nice and peaceful.  Nothing much happening.
I remembered many better ones when I caught a nice string of Bass,

>>Wayne's right. I specifically wanted to avoid any additional debate on

the subject of hunting, which quickly segues into animal rights which,
quite understandably, has always blossomed into a donnybrook of near-
epic proportions. 

  Yes, I follow your logic and I agree.



Which suggests that detailed discussions of pest control ideas with
fatal results are a much less attractive subject in general than those
clever, non-destructive techniques. 
  My simple system seems to still be working.  I have so many peas and 
other nice crops, I scattered another box of mothballs around the field 
this evening.



If anyone has questions related to our main topic, or health-related
questions they'd like help with, of course we're waiting to hear from
you...


 True.  As I said, the list wins an award for variety, and CS information 
also.


 What more could you want ?   

 Wayne

===


--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.

Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org

To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com

Address Off-Topic messages to: silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com

The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down...

List maintainer: Mike Devour 
  

Re: CS>CS ppm

[Dee]

Thank you Ode, I do believe I've got it!  Dee 

---Original Message---
 
From: Ode Coyote
Date: 07/04/08 17:34:08
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: CS>CS ppm
 
 
  uS is the symbol for Microsiemens as conductivity per cubic centimeter
of  a liquid, used by conductivity meters. [ALL meters are conductivity
meters]
 
  Silver comes off the electrodes as conductive ions and some of it
converts to nonconductive forms over time [ "colloids" aka "particles" ]
that meters won't register.
  Therefore, a meter reading drops over time without the water losing any
silver.
 
 

RE: CS>CS ppm ( EC and ppm

[Jim Meissner yahoo]

Dear Wayne:

 

>> As I have said, no ppm meter exists in the world today.  Just because
many people use the EC meter and call the results ppm metes does not  a ppm
meter exist.

 

Actually there are at least two scientific instruments that directly measure
silver concentration.  One is a probe similar to a pH probe that
specifically measures silver concentration.  The other is a photo
spectrometer.  Neither one is cheap.   I have been to Frank Key's lab
several times and the device he uses burns the silver sample in a plasma
then measures the frequency spectrum emitted and the magnatude in relation
to a certified standard.

 

It just so happens that the collidal silver made by my generator shows that
uS is a 1 to 1 realation to PPM using the Hanna PWT tester.  Other EC meters
probably will be different.  See the test report at
http://meissnerresearch.com/products/silver-generator .

 

Jim Meissner   www.MeissnerResearch.com 

  _  

From: Wayne Fugitt [mailto:cwa...@netdoor.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 4:37 PM
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Subject: CS>CS ppm ( EC and ppm

 

At 12:33 PM 7/3/2008, you wrote:



What does this mean Ode?  What exactly is uS and why doesn't the amount of
silver in the water change?  Many thanks.  Dee 


Dee,

You should know that before you start talking ppm.

Where could the silver go ?  How could it get out ?
Just like Ode said.

The MicroSiemens can change it appears.  Not all salts are conductive, not
equally anyway.
That is only one reason why microseimens is not ppm.   


Conductivity is a measurement of the ability of a solution to conduct an
electric current. An instrument measures conductivity by placing two plates
of conductive material with know area and distance apart in a sample.  Then
a voltage potential is applied and the resulting current is measured.   
===

For many years the unit of conductivity was the mho, the mili mho, and the
micro mho.

Mho is a goofy word, the unit of resistance, ( ohm ) spelled backwards.
How about that ?

Don't worry so much and realize you are guessing and using approximations.
What difference does it make anyway ?

As I have said, no ppm meter exists in the world today.  Just because many
people use the EC meter and call the results ppm metes does not  a ppm meter
exist.

You don't believe me ?

The instrument industry makes it crystal clear.  They are even trying to
combine and make one unit,
EC and ppm.  

While they may do it, rest assured the knowledgeable people will never
accept it, not in
100 years.

Some very expensive meters will measure only one kind or salt, not two or
three.
They can come close to ppm, . maybe.

But I only trust calculated ppm as being very close, as close as one can get
by normal means.

Wayne

Re: CS>High Tech Repellant System

[M. G. Devour]

Sharon wrote:
> Oh, how I wish! I've thrown mothballs, chlorine tabs, smoke bombs, and,
> believe it or not, dried coyote urine under the shed where those fat
> varmints thrive!
> 
> They picked up the chlorine tabs, and the mothballs, and literally threw
> them back out the holes!

Which turns this into an engineering problem... How 'bout putting those 
kinds of things in a sturdy metal container with holes in it and 
anchoring it under there on a chain or a pole? If they can't get at it 
to move it, they might decide not to live with it.

Of course, if you *do* get them to move, you might want to take a look 
around first and think about where they might decide to move *TO!*

> Back up to the house, watching from the deck, I swear those *%*&^
> groundhogs came out from under the shed (they've hollowed it out under
> there) and waved at me.

A truly Disney-esque image! 

Be well,

Mike D.

[Mike Devour, Citizen, Patriot, Libertarian]
[mdev...@eskimo.com]
[Speaking only for myself...   ]


--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.

Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org

To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com

Address Off-Topic messages to: silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com

The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down...

List maintainer: Mike Devour 
   

CS>[List Owner] Topic control...

[M. G. Devour]

Hi folks! Hope those of you in the 'states are enjoying a nice 4th of 
July weekend!

Sol wrote:
> >  I see Mike has deep sixed this topic it seems,

Wayne wrote:
> I understood Mikes message to mean Hunting and Not hunting.  I did not
> understand it to mean growing food, pests, and pests control.  If I
> had, I would not have posted the 2 or so messages about that. 

Wayne's right. I specifically wanted to avoid any additional debate on 
the subject of hunting, which quickly segues into animal rights which, 
quite understandably, has always blossomed into a donnybrook of near-
epic proportions. 

Which suggests that detailed discussions of pest control ideas with 
fatal results are a much less attractive subject in general than those 
clever, non-destructive techniques. 

All of which falls under the umbrella of the modest, meandering 
discussions of things NOT directly related to CS or alternative heath 
that I will happily tolerate when there's not a lot else going on.

If anyone has questions related to our main topic, or health-related 
questions they'd like help with, of course we're waiting to hear from 
you...

Peace,

Mike Devour
silver-list owner

[Mike Devour, Citizen, Patriot, Libertarian]
[mdev...@eskimo.com]
[Speaking only for myself...   ]


--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.

Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org

To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com

Address Off-Topic messages to: silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com

The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down...

List maintainer: Mike Devour 
   

Re: CS>CS ppm

[Ode Coyote]

 uS is the symbol for Microsiemens as conductivity per cubic centimeter 
of  a liquid, used by conductivity meters. [ALL meters are conductivity meters]


 Silver comes off the electrodes as conductive ions and some of it 
converts to nonconductive forms over time [ "colloids" aka "particles" ] 
that meters won't register.
 Therefore, a meter reading drops over time without the water losing any 
silver.



It's like making rock candy.
 So long as the string of sugar crystals is still in the water, there's 
still the same amount of sugar in the water as before the crystals formed.
 Using a hydrometer on sugar water before and after..same thing as there 
is less sugar "dissolved" in the water making the water less dense and 
sinking the hydrometer more, but the crystallized string is still in the 
jar making the total sugar in the jar the same.


 Comparisons made by instruments that actually DO measure PPM, compared to 
meter readings that DON'T  [and none do] , show a close 1 to 1 
correspondence between the conductivity "number" in uS and the PPM "number" 
as actual PPM in silver water [ at around 10 -12  uS ]  that has stopped 
dropping its conductivity with colloid conversions completed. [aka 
"stabilized" CS ]


 Lower PPM CS will do fewer conversion than higher due to solubility 
limits of silver ions in water not being exceeded as much, thus will drop 
less.
 So, when using a meter on low PPM CS you can fudge the meters number down 
a little, but fudge it up some on very high numbers as very high PPM CS 
will have a higher percentage of unreadable colloidal particles.


At over around 30 uS, the stabilized numbers become meaningless and the *as 
yet to be stabilized* numbers can be used to make something just under a 
wild guess.
So, if you run it up to 80 uS the actual silver content is probably more 
like 100 PPM as colloid crystals are forming like mad as you make it, but 
it will slowly drop back to 30 uS over time as even more colloids form later.
 Using a meter on 30 uS CS later, won't tell you if it's 35 PPM or 350 PPM 
total silver...you only know it's over 30 PPM.




Ode


At 06:33 PM 7/3/2008 +0100, you wrote:
What does this mean Ode?  What exactly is uS and why doesn't the amount of 
silver in the water change?  Many thanks.  Dee


---Original Message---

From: Ode Coyote
Date: 07/03/08 14:18:09
To: silver-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: CS>CS ppm

More accurately without mixing terms:

>Just to report that this batch of CS tested out at 18 uS when it was first
>made, and 12uS two days later when uS = PPM.

  The amount of silver in the water didn't change.



Ode





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.134 / Virus Database: 270.4.4/1532 - Release Date: 7/3/2008 
8:32 AM



--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.

Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org

To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com

Address Off-Topic messages to: silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com

The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down...

List maintainer: Mike Devour 
  

RE: CS> galvanic action

[Ode Coyote]

  I would think it will work better if there is an electrical contact 
point somewhere, but need not be in the area of corrosion. [like connecting 
a battery to something will discharge it faster that just letting it sit]


Ode

At 09:54 AM 7/3/2008 -0500, you wrote:

Does it matter if the aluminum and silver mass touch each other, or not?

According to Dave's description, if they are separated and in an
electrolytic solution, the aluminum or copper should corrode.

> > >"When two metals are in contact in an electrolyte, the one higher
up in this series is the anode, the corroded metal, while the one lower
is the cathode, the protected metal."

If they were touching and the other ends were in the electrolyte, would
that cause the release of silver into the electrolyte, or am I just
mixed up?...

Dan

> -Original Message-
> From: Ode Coyote [mailto:odecoy...@alltel.net]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:07 AM
> To: silver-list@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: CS> galvanic action
>
>
>
>The silver  bandaid works on this principle.
>   One layer of Silver thread and a layer of Aluminum thread
> with body fluid as the electrolyte.
> Silver Ions get stripped and head for the Aluminum, getting
> lost in the wound and sterilizing it.
>
> It's the same process as removing tarnish from Silver with
> Aluminum foil and salt water or vinegar or baking soda water.
>
> Ode
>
>
> At 04:11 PM 7/2/2008 -0500, you wrote:
> >Dave,
> >
> >Is there any way to use silver and an anodic metal so that
> they would
> >release silver  into a passive system (no conventional
> battery) such as
> >for purifying drinking water etc?  Similar to the effort of
> the potters
> >for peace silver impregnated water filter, but using the galvanic
> >potential of metals?
> >
> >If so, how exactly would it have to be hooked up?  Ode and
> Marshall (I
> >think it was) implied that it was possible, but from your
> description,
> >it appears to be working backwards.
> >
> >Dan
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: David Bearrow [mailto:chip...@verizon.net]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 4:41 PM
> > > To: silver-list@eskimo.com
> > > Subject: RE: CS>Big WOOPS! galvanic action
> > >
> > > What you are experiencing is known as galvanic action.
> > > Whenever dissimilar metals are in the presence of an
> electrolyte, a
> > > difference in electrical potential develops.
> > > One metal becomes the cathode and receives a positive charge.
> > > The other metal becomes the anode and receives a negative charge.
> > > When these metals are in contact, an electrical current
> will flow,
> > > as in the case of any short-circuited electric cell. This
> > > electrolytic action causes an attack of the anodic metal, leaving
> > > the cathodic metal unharmed. The extent of the attack is
> > > proportional to the strength of the electrolytic current,
> which in
> > > turn is proportional to the electric potential difference
> developed.
> > > The magnitude of the potential difference generated between two
> > > dissimilar metals can be seen by the position of these
> metals in the
> > > electrolytic series. When two metals are in contact in an
> > > electrolyte, the one higher up in this series is the anode, the
> > > corroded metal, while the one lower is the cathode, the protected
> > > metal. The further apart the metals are in this series,
> the greater
> > > the electrolytic potential difference, and the greater
> the attack to
> > > the anodic metal. Note that silver and copper are quite
> far apart in
> > > the series, silver being cathodic and copper anodic. Hence, when
> > > copper and silver are in contact in an electrolyte, the
> copper can
> > > be expected to be severely attacked. This causes the copper to be
> > > attracted to the silver. This attraction of opposite polarities
> > > causes the silver to be pulled out of suspension and
> deposit on the
> > > copper. I would bet that steel, aluminum, and zinc which are even
> > > less noble than copper would also do the same thing.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > PS - I have added a small portion of the electrolytic
> series below:
> > >
> > > LESS NOBLE (ANODIC)+
> > > Magnesium
> > > Magnesium alloys
> > > Zinc
> > > Aluminum 1100
> > > Cadmium
> > > Aluminum 2024-T4
> > > Steel or Iron
> > > Cast Iron
> > > Chromium Iron
> > > (Active)
> > > Ni-Resist
> > > Type 304 Stainless
> > > (Active)
> > > Type 316 Stainless
> > > (Active)
> > > Lead Tin Solders
> > > Lead
> > > Tin
> > > Nickle (Active)
> > > Inconel
> > > Brasses
> > > Copper
> > > Bronzes
> > > Copper-nickle alloys
> > > Monel
> > > Silver Solder
> > > Nickel (Passive)
> > > Inconel (Passive)
> > > Chromium-Iron
> > > (Passive)
> > > Type 304 Stainless
> > > (Passive)
> > > Type 316 Stainless
> > > (Passive)
> > > Silver
> > > Titanium
> > > Graphite
> > > Gold
> > > Platinum
> > > MORE NOBLE (CATHODIC)-
> > >
> > > At 05:39 AM 7/1/2008, you wrote:
> > > >Initially, I used insulated copper wire wound around a
> > > plastic f