So pretty much only Ancotar here has done a controlled comparison of salt vs no salt? And you, that so much propose the use of salt have done none?

It is awkward to say, but, that for a man of who claims to be a scientist with lab experience, such overlooking of side-by-side comparisons is at best poor amateurism.

Controls are the quintessence of science, and as a scientist who is willing to suggest and guide others in their experiments (such as Kerberos in this case) you should at least have the moral obligation to suggest side-by-side comparisons. Kerberos has been loyal to your advice, but since you failed to suggest controls all of his experiments and results are of little value.

I understand and share your love for extractions and for perfecting them but you haven't been throwing much science to us here. Still, you're only talks and theories, as you've been previously been warned of. I am afraid that since the nexus is so based in science (at least with regard to these very technical aspects), I will be keeping a close eye on you from now on.

infin, I admitted in my original post that it was poor judgement to leave out the control jars, and why do you have such an extreme distaste for me? I have done nothing but put forth ideas that so far have been proving to be very beneficial. I do not understand the hostility. I already told you that I plan to continue experimenting, and also said in my original salt post that it would be a while before I could do any furthur experiments. I have attempted to tell you how much I respect your opinions, yet you seem to not have any respect for me or my opinions at all. I don't mind you keeping as close an eye on me as you want. Perhaps you would be encouraged to join those of us who are collaborating right now. Your last post you suggested that I do exactly what I am doing. I apologized for my hastiness in drawing conclusions, but saying that ancotar is the only one who has tested the hypothesis is a disrespect for cyb's tek, as this is the basis of his tek, which has been getting amazing results. I feel as if you do not see me for who I am and rather have a preconceived notion preventing you from getting to know me and my sensibilities. I hope through keeping an eye on me that can change, as I still have nothing but respect for you and your work. I am puzzled by this? have you thoroughly read my original salt post? Or the results people are getting using cyb's tek? Cyb and I are working together on something I believe will be special, and will involve many other experimenters, who will all be given credit for the experiments they contributed.

Your distaste for me is unexpected and I apologize for whatever has driven it to such extremes, but I still respect you and your view so thank you for your criticism as it should help me grow in some way.

Love and light brother,
CTM

There's neither hostility nor distaste from my side - my apologies if you took it like that.

But your lack of controls (in this case) or a general lack of controls esp when you state:
definitely raises a red flag for me. Mind you, it raise would for almost every science-minded. Amazing results from the tek? or amazing results from very good starting material? And why all these wild ad hocs (with micelles in the STB and what not...) when kerberos did not get an (as you expected) phenomenal yield? It is very simple my man and it fits in one sentence:

No controlled experiment = no much you can discuss about results.

Now, we've both said enough; please give us more science and a tad less assertions and you're good.

I was again proposing explanations that I cleerly indicated as needing to be tested. And cyb also performed experiments, and so have others. Why not provide me with some useful feedback on my ideas rather than just dismissing everything I say as "ad hoc". I'm done trying to explain myself here, and I hope you re-read my original post entitled "Salt" so you can see exactly how all of this unfolded and where these ideas are coming from.

I'll be experimenting in a few weeks, then I can test my ideas, but its always nice to get feedback before running the tests, so sometimes proposing theories as to what might be happening is beneficial. I hope you take the time to follow the experiments that others and myself are collaborating on so you can see how wonderful a thing it really is. I get your point, but I think you are atemmpting to belittle me for things that are done by many other members on many other threads, so I do feel like this is personal for some reason. I wish I knew what I did to make you feel this way about me.

Love and Respect Infin, you are my brother,

CTM

Thanks, good to know we're on the same page. I like theorising as well, but only when there are have valid results at hand.

I'd suggest that for your experiments to split a typical noman tek (or whatever tek yo uplan on using) in 5 sides, each with 0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% salt. Record how much you get from each pull from each treatment. It would great to know rate of extraction as well as yield. This is for experimental purposes, you won't need more that 5-20g of mhrb per treatment group.

Then extend same experiments to other plants to verify if observations from mhrb hold true in other systems. A.confusa and chaliponga come to mind as two good alternatives. chaliponga is rich in hydrophiles/fats/etc and you could also hit two birds with one stone, shedding light in your micelles interpretation.

As an undergraduate my research was focused around the behavior of d-limonene in aqueous surfactant solutions in regards to many factors including the ionic strength of the solutions. With some of the detergents we were using we found that at lower ionic strengths the limonene would aggregate on its own, but at higher ionic strengths it would incorporate into the micellar formations. We primarily used 2D-NMR experiments to figure all this out and could absolutely verify this behavior for the detergent company that funded the research. If you would like to know how we did this send me a PM as it involves discussion of stokes-einstein equation and altering the pulse programs of the NMR experiments. Which would likely bore the crap out of most people. This is why I came up with this hypothesis, but only after incorporating your thoughts on the fatty acids in solution upon saponification of triglycerides. We also showed that the surfactants formed micelles much faster as ionic strength increased, but the effect was different for each surfactant we worked with.

You just can't help theorising, can you? In theory, practise and theory are the same but in practice they're not. You can only draw that much conclusions based on theory alone.

If I had a dime for every theoretical prediction I've made that, upon experimentation, fell flat on its face, I'd be rich all-right.

I just can't stop seeking a better understanding of how to empty our source materials of all the spice they contain. I theorize because that is the process by which I come up with experiments to test what it is I am theorizing. And that last post was not theorizing, it was just an explanation of a past research experience that is related to the topic. We all theorize, thats the first step in the scientific method is it not? First you form a hypothesis, then you think of a way to test it, then you either verify or debunk the theory you were testing. I'm not the only one on this forum who theorizes, not by a long shot. So please don't single me out as someone with crazy ideas who fails to contribute. I feel like my theorizing has led to some great things here and I'm sure there are other members on here who agree with me on that one. If I had a nickel for every time I read a theory from someone on this site, I would be rich as well. Lots of theories fail to prove to be true, that's just how science works, I don't put my theories up as facts though as you imply. I say perhaps this is happening or this might be happening. I only state things as facts when they are proven. I admit there is a lot of experimenting that needs to be done, but that will come in time. But when we all theorize together, then experiment together, we make progress together. I have been proven wrong many times and am not at all ashamed to admit that. Every scientist makes bad predictions, but I have also made plenty of good predictions and had many of my theories prove to be true. I don't believe the nexus should be void of theories, do you? After all, there are a lot of theoretical discussions that stimulate great ideas when they reach the right mind. Like I said before, if you want the details of my research with surfactants and micelles and how they incorporate non-polar fragrance molecules like d-limonene, I will be happy to discuss this with you through PM to assure you that it is not theory. I can even send you the data if you would like it. I would just have to get it from my old prof. Who I still maintain communication with via e-mail.

Love and Light brother, I am your friend, not your foe, please try to remember that.

CTM

as one scientist speaking to another, I hope you realize that nothing in science is ever proven; the best we can do is show probabilities correlating data, i.e. showing evidence to support a claim; plausibility.
If I had a nickel everytime I've explained this to people, I'd be rich too.

"Proof of concept" is the only "proof" term used when discussing method/technique development...but this basically what you're contemplating here, extraction 'tek' method dev. Commercials and ads trying to sell you something are the only sources for claims of "proven to...", and even now some commercials have revised that phrase to the more accurate "clinically-shown to...". Evidence "suggests", it doesn't "prove".

Well I can't argue with that. There really is very little we actually "know". Most of chemistry is built out of theory. orbital hybridization might be a great model and work in most instances, but it's still only a theory and it doesn't always appear to be true. It's just the best understanding we have of how electrons behave in molecules. So my statement there was meant to carry a different meaning than a literal interpretation would provide. I should have said something like "I only say that a certain method will benefit an extraction for sure if I have seen that it is true in practice". I may make suggestions based on my theories, but I word them so that they are clearly seen as theories, at least I attempt to. I have been encouraging a lot of experimentation on a few ideas and I am having trouble understanding why this is being seen as a bad thing. I think those of us who have chemical knowledge should use it to try and improve our techniques and give everyone better yields. Recently that's what I've been seeing happening. I can't wait to be able to continue experimenting myself, but I'm grateful for those who are out there testing these ideas while I am unable to perform these experiments myself. I love the way a bunch of nexians are coming together to fine tune all aspects of cyb's tek to allow for maximum yield with minimal effort. I think this place is special.

I truly love all of you,

CTM

I appreciate your enthusiasm and willingness to do the work, as do others.
I have to admit, I'm very lazy. I still need to elaborate on a scheme for solvent partitioning to separate gramine from dmt; I hope you have some ideas on something like this,
solvent partitioning is a nice alternative to more involved chromatography techniques

We've had several ideas on the site, from cellulase to various physical methods (which I favor for time and efficiency).
A couple of us use power sonication for small batches, and pressure cooking for larger ones.
microwave-assisted extraction is another nice one.

You seem to be stuck on the third step, and then skipping to the 7th. (I know you didn't mean it intentionally but it looked like you took credit for anctor's experiemnt. I wasn't pleased to read that.)



I don't doubt your theories, its a lot of great material.

But like benzyme and infundibulum have pointed out. You've got to follow the WHOLE chart.

I think your a great scientist CTM but you gotta follow the rules to get along with the scientific community, its a dog eat dog world out there.

I may not have grad school credentials yet, or a flask. But i have a brain

benz, I honestly don't know much about gramine. I will take a look at the physical characteristics though and see if a physical seperation idea comes to mind. I would have to look at the structure and think about it but if something comes to me I will let you know for sure.

Mindlusion, I see what you mean about taking credit for Ancotar's experiment, but I swear this was not what I was thinking when I wrote that. There were so many ideas put forth at the time of my last extraction that I didn't think of until after I had the process too far along to do any of the tests I wanted to. I was honestly sincere in my gratitude for him for running the experiment.
I also see your point about skipping a few steps, but when I read posts I generally start thinking about it on the page, and I will try my best to keep that to a minimum. I've just recently found so much enthusiasm for this as my time for working on this again is approaching and I'm very excited, so I might occasionally start throwing out ideas, but I will always include a proper disclaimer.

I'm not on this forum to have those experiences I had meeting with hostile scientists in the workplace. I come here because it has always had a special atmosphere of mutual respect and appreciation. I honestly feel that the members of this community are a very special group of people. I love everyone on here and I truly mean that.

Love and Respect to all of you,

CTM

Glad to hear



This is a very special forum.
I joined it for that very reason. BUT, I also joined it for the dedicated scientific community. This forum has become sloppy in the past scientifically. But it keeps its shape due to some amazing dedicated members and scientists, that you have had the pleasure to converse with. (<3 you guys)

ScienceMadness, for instance. Is a fantastic forum. They can seem hostile, but it creates such a great forum. It can seem quite cold hearted, but I definitely feel the love on that forum


and I get that, about hostile scientists in the work place. Like i said, its a dog eat dog world. But its like that for a reason. I mean it has its downsides.

But where would science be if we made 'love and respect' a variable in our results? Sloppy, Sloppy results. Ain't no love when it comes to that.

Mind, I suppose I reacted so defensively because I didn't expect that kind of response to my ideas. Had there been some reasoning as to why the ideas were flawed in some way I would have been less offended, but I felt like I was being singled out. I see postings all over this forum where members speculate about a lot of problems happening in extractions, and have never seen them put down for it. I agree that the egos of scientists can be beneficial to the advancement of science, but here we are mainly dealing with extraction teks(at least the posts I spend most of my time on) and these teks don't have much left to develop other than optimizing various steps and amounts of material used. I appreciate constructive criticism, I just didn't find most of the criticism I received to be constructive. I felt like I was being told to keep my mouth shut until I have tested my ideas, which I believe will prevent others from attempting them while I cannot. I did however just place an order for a large amount of acacia, because I don't want to go to reorder and find that it has also disappeared from the market like mimosa. This means that when it arrives on my doorstep I will be able to start running all the tests I need to in order to test my ideas. I do have an immense amount of respect for all the other scientists on this forum and for the dedication they have put into keeping this forum a perfect place for beginners and experienced extractors alike to seek out the information they need to make their extractions a success.

So again I apologize for my defensiveness, and hope that we can all work together to completely deplete the available sources of the spice they contain. I realize this is a process and I will be adhering much more closely to the scientific method when I am running my own tests. I always keep a detailed lab notebook of everything I do, so I may even make this available to the community when I finish my experimentation. I hope that if anyone here does have some resentment or problem with me that it can be solved through civil conversations that do not involve attacking the character of one another. I would prefer these issues to be solved via PM before placing hostility and adversity on the public parts of the forum, as I believe this is only harmful to our community at large.

Sincere Love for every single person who reads this,

CTM

I love you guys! (And gals!)

<GROUP HUG>

Each case is different.


Sorry you feel like that. Your #1 person to consult is The Traveler, to whom you can lay your case if you think you've been mistreated, or maybe better contact people who you think mistreated you via PM. I think you did enough boo-hoo hoo in the open forum.

I am over-defensive, I am over-sensitive, and I am sorry for the lack of understanding I have demonstrated in my response to criticism. I am dealing with a lot these days and admit that it has taken a toll on me mentally and physically. This forum has been my place of retreat to keep myself sane. I don't mean to boo-hoo any more than I already have, but I am dealing with addiction problems as well as a movement disorder. The lack of work where I live just got a whole lot worse for scientists and I'm unemployed, and I have not even been able to get an interview in nearly 3 months of searching. I am honestly sorry for my ridiculous amount of defensiveness and lack of respect demonstrated to the members who taught me what I needed to know to do an extraction without my lab equipment. I had several failed attempts before learning from Traveler, infin, benz, 69ron, endlessness, and many of those who were making this forum what it is from the early days. There are many people on this site who deserve a tremendous amount of respect due to the fact that they started what blossomed into this wonderful community.

I will begin experimenting again very soon, and will be able to test my ideas, I'll try to keep everything to just reporting findings rather than the amount of time I spend speculating as to the behavior of molecules in a complex mixture of them. I humbly apologize for the response I displayed. I will work on my ability to take criticism.

Sincerely,

CTM

you are human, as are all of us.
i'm a bit of a weirdo, but human nonetheless. i've actually
replied to more than a few threads regarding blatant fear
and ignorance of solvents in a cold, brash manner; shot down some
''hippy teks" for their inefficacy or irreproducibility.

i need to work on my patience and tone, in that regard.
some folks were way worse on the hive and sm.