Craig, .2 is correct. Ivan did some very good work on this in the group some time ago. Are you still there, Ivan? The idea is to start with very few ions of any type. This will mean, especially with low voltage, that the current will be very low at the start. Silver ions will be released from the anode and will start on their journey to the cathode. Again, because the voltage is low, the speed is relatively low. Using a relatively small spacing between the anode and cathode at the start can speed up the process. As more silver ions enter the solution, the effective resistance of the cell will decrease until the voltage drop across the cell is in the order of 2 volts. At this point, the solution will have all the ions it can hold and they will be silver ions, not ions formed by stirring or blowing in air.
Arnold ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Chamberlin" <c...@itsmyplace.com> To: <silver-list@eskimo.com>; "Arnold Beland" <abel...@tampabay.rr.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:38 PM Subject: Re: CS>Testers > Arnold, > > Which value is correct: 0.2 or 2 uA/square mm electrode? > > Also, shouldn't deionized water produce much less ionic silver? > > Thank you, > > Craig Chamberlin > > Arnold Beland wrote: > > > > I think that if we stick to the rule of .2 microamps per sq. mm of the anode > > we should arrive at an approximate method. Limiting the current to this > > extent has enabled me to make batches with a high effect of beam scattering > > while maintaining a very clear solution. Of course, the purity of the water > > that we start with is of paramount importance. The extreme variability that > > you refer to is caused by the lack of control of the current density. > > Without effective current control, the process enters a runaway chaotic mode > > that I suppose a butterfly in the Amazon could have some effect on. > > Please note that I did not say that we could determine particle size > > distribution by this method. I think that as long as we stay away from the > > yellow color for our final solution, our particle size will be pretty good > > and repeatable. Even the smallest possible particle size, say 10nm, will > > cause visible scattering of the laser beam. I have seen it stated in this > > forum that a particle has to be the same size as the wavelength of the laser > > beam to be visible. That is not true. The confusion is probably caused by > > thinking in terms of a tracking radar. > > I am not saying that this method will be the equal of a Malvern > > Zetasizer ($40,000). I would love to have one of those, but when I talk to > > my wife about it, she says well, maybe NEXT Christmas. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Arnold Beland > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Marshall Dudley" <mdud...@execonn.com> > > To: <silver-list@eskimo.com> > > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:29 PM > > Subject: Re: CS>Testers > > > > > That is not possible without knowing the particle size, which can vary > > > significantly from one batch to another, depending on voltage, current, > > wire > > > length, wire spacing, temperuture, water purity, and some even say the > > phase of > > > the moon. > > > > > > Marshall > > > > > > Arnold Beland wrote: > > > > > > > What I dislike most about the keychain type is the fact that you have to > > > > keep replacing those little hearing aid batteries. The type I'm > > referring > > > > to use the same AAA batteries that you use in your TV remote control, > > > > available everywhere. The beam from them is typically broader, thus > > > > reducing the amount of optical power available in a given volume of > > water. > > > > I would like to encourage as much standardization as possible. If > > enough of > > > > us on the list had them, along with a light meter, we might arrive at a > > > > method of measuring the ppm of true colloidal silver without the use of > > a > > > > $40,000 particle analyzer. > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > > > > > Arnold Beland > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Gaston" <obouc...@colba.net> > > > > To: <silver-list@eskimo.com> > > > > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 2:05 PM > > > > Subject: Re: CS>Testers > > > > > > > > > Hi Arnold, > > > > > > > > > > You wrote: > > > > > > > > > > " > Try to get a quality laser pointer, not the key chain type. The > > > > class > > > > > > IIIa 5mW units are best. They are available on ebay constantly at > > > > > > reasonable prices." > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested to know the difference(s) between a quality > > laser > > > > pointer > > > > > and a key chain type pls other than the price. > > > > > > > > > > I understand that the key chain type uses in general a wavelength > > > > > of 630-680nM and its max. output power is < 5mW. > > > > > > > > > > I do use the key chain type and appears to work ok for me. > > > > > if I remember correctly advices on this list was that, this was ok > > to > > > > use. > > > > > > > > > > Comments would be appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Gaston > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal > > silver. > > > > > > > > > > To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message > > to: > > > > > silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com > > > > > with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. > > > > > > > > > > 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> > > > > > > > > > > > >
