CHATPRIVACYDONATELOGINREGISTER
DMT-Nexus
FAQWIKIHEALTH & SAFETYARTATTITUDEACTIVE TOPICS
Question about acidification and basification Options
 
Th Entity
#1 Posted : 1/13/2019 12:28:22 PM

I can't think of anything important or deep to add here, excuse me!


Posts: 348
Joined: 27-Oct-2018
Last visit: 22-Jul-2020
Location: The dream room, wonderland
Hey Nexians!

In the past 2 weeks i've been reading all the teks from all the categories and im reading a lot of posts about extracting, im taking notes and im looking for a tek that i will be using as basis for a procedure that i like, so far my favourite teks are Vovins and Cybs max ion, however i think there are few things i would like to add/remove from them, but before i do there will be a lot more reading and i'll be posting more questions.

In max ion i saw this:

Base
4. Dissolve apprx 40g of NaOH (Lye) in a minimal
amount of COOL filtered water (approx 100ml) and
add to the acidic/saline mix.
A pH of 12+ is desired, so add more if necessary.
5. Warm the mix in the heat bath for 2 hours
(stir occasionally)
{Low heat, the glass vessel should be able to be
handled without burning}
6. After 2 hours, cool to room temperature

Question: Why warm/heat when basifying? If we didnt freeze/thaw or acidify then i understand but in the max ion tek we do. Freeze/thawing would lyse the cells, the acidic cook would lyse the cells and breakdown plant proteins (if held at good temperature, and good amount of time), which would be great because according to CTM this will increase ionic strenght in AQ solution. But why we have to use heat/warm when basifying? that would be overkill and unnecessary to me. I dont see any reason behind it (im not a chemist). Please explain

Another question: When people refer to Acid Boils, what they exactly mean? Boiling RB/water/acid together or RB/water/acid in heatbath or Boiling acid/water and adding to bark with heatbath later or what exactly? This term was used to explain different procedures in different teks.

I think the only time/things heat should be applied to is the solvent(when pulling) and when acidifying.

P.S - i generally dont want to post because i feel like its been beaten to death (those topics) but i cant find them via the search engine and google search.
Peace Smile
 

Good quality Syrian rue (Peganum harmala) for an incredible price!
 
pete666
#2 Posted : 1/14/2019 8:40:26 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 892
Joined: 13-Jan-2018
Last visit: 14-Nov-2019
I don't see any reason why you should warm it up at that stage too. But I am not an author of this TEK, there might be some reason.

There is no need to use a heatbath for acid boils. So this is right - Boiling RB/water/acid together
Acceptance of the fact that our reality is not real doesn't in fact mean it is not real. It just leads to better understanding what real means.
 
Psilosopher?
#3 Posted : 1/14/2019 9:04:06 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 742
Joined: 28-Dec-2014
Last visit: 05-Feb-2020
Location: Everywhen
I keep the entire process at 60C, from acidification to solvent pulling.

More heat means more Brownian motion, which means more molecular collision. Reaction rate is hastened by heat.


From going through many extractions, i don't leave anything to chance. Overkill is better than no kill. There is no guarantee that every cell will be lysed from the freeze/thaw. Even the acid cook might not fully lyse the cells, depending on the texture of the starting material. The basification will reduce even semi-solid strips of bark into a sludgy mess, allowing better access to the juicy innards.
"Better than a thousand hollow words, is one word that brings peace." - Buddha
 
pete666
#4 Posted : 1/14/2019 9:12:12 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 892
Joined: 13-Jan-2018
Last visit: 14-Nov-2019
Psilosopher? wrote:
The basification will reduce even semi-solid strips of bark into a sludgy mess, allowing better access to the juicy innards.


That is questionable for such low pH.
In STB (which I prefer) this is the only cell lysis method and it works flawlessly, but the lye concentration is much higher.
Acceptance of the fact that our reality is not real doesn't in fact mean it is not real. It just leads to better understanding what real means.
 
Psilosopher?
#5 Posted : 1/14/2019 9:16:59 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 742
Joined: 28-Dec-2014
Last visit: 05-Feb-2020
Location: Everywhen
pete666 wrote:
Psilosopher? wrote:
The basification will reduce even semi-solid strips of bark into a sludgy mess, allowing better access to the juicy innards.


That is questionable for such low pH.
In STB (which I prefer) this is the only cell lysis method and it works flowlessly, but the lye concentration is much higher.


Low pH is acidic. Regardless of how acidic the solution, the constitution of the plant material does not change. The base causes more noticeable disintegration the plant material.

"Better than a thousand hollow words, is one word that brings peace." - Buddha
 
pete666
#6 Posted : 1/14/2019 11:16:08 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 892
Joined: 13-Jan-2018
Last visit: 14-Nov-2019
Psilosopher? wrote:
pete666 wrote:
Psilosopher? wrote:
The basification will reduce even semi-solid strips of bark into a sludgy mess, allowing better access to the juicy innards.


That is questionable for such low pH.
In STB (which I prefer) this is the only cell lysis method and it works flowlessly, but the lye concentration is much higher.


Low pH is acidic. Regardless of how acidic the solution, the constitution of the plant material does not change. The base causes more noticeable disintegration the plant material.



No, low pH is relative term. pH 12 is low compared to pH 14. This was the message.
As stated before STB uses mich higher concentration of lye, so much higher pH than just 12.
Acceptance of the fact that our reality is not real doesn't in fact mean it is not real. It just leads to better understanding what real means.
 
Th Entity
#7 Posted : 1/14/2019 2:59:03 PM

I can't think of anything important or deep to add here, excuse me!


Posts: 348
Joined: 27-Oct-2018
Last visit: 22-Jul-2020
Location: The dream room, wonderland
Quote:
I keep the entire process at 60C
Thats cool but i bet you pull more oils/fats and unwanted material, and in some stages of the process i think thats unecessary. But whatever works for you. CTM suggest if using heat to break down plant proteins for more ionic strenght you should use 70C for hours.

Quote:
More heat means more Brownian motion, which means more molecular collision. Reaction rate is hastened by heat.
That is true but you can use more water to compensate for the heat, and i dont think heating both the naptha and aq solution while pulling will give the most saturated pulls because the dmt would become more soluble in both liquids (even if freebase, thats what i read)
"solutes are more soluble in heated solvents (water/non polar)" The only reason why one would use heat after basification and during pulling is to achive faster separation of the layers and pull more stuff (fats,oils) This is the only reason that comes to mind. But the difference in the amount of DMT pulled with heat on both layers vs only heated nonpolar wont be dramatic if there is any at all, the only increase in yield from heating bothlayers would be from unwanted things like fats/oils.. i think, which would complicate things because you would have to do more cleaning later.

Quote:
i don't leave anything to chance. Overkill is better than no kill. There is no guarantee that every cell will be lysed from the freeze/thaw. Even the acid cook might not fully lyse the cells, depending on the texture of the starting material. The basification will reduce even semi-solid strips of bark into a sludgy mess, allowing better access to the juicy innards.


I think thats overkill heres why: First the bark is sliced to powder in high speed, beated to dust, then its heated in waterbath (max ion) then freeze/thawed 3x and then its boiled in acid and then
(if not filtered) its in high pH enviroment, and most of these are done over hours and hours.
Makes no sense to me to potentially contaminate final product with fats/oils and wasting time for
multiple cleaning steps (to remove those oils) later. And in the end it probabbly wont even increase the overall DMT pulled.



 
Th Entity
#8 Posted : 1/14/2019 3:15:39 PM

I can't think of anything important or deep to add here, excuse me!


Posts: 348
Joined: 27-Oct-2018
Last visit: 22-Jul-2020
Location: The dream room, wonderland
You said it: More heat means more Brownian motion, which means more molecular collision.
Which one would guess means more dmt (overall or per pull) but is that the case?

Most solutes are more soluble in heated solvent (water/nonpolar) + heat more motion = more molecular collision (keep in mind that dmt present in bark is limited to 2-3% according to the information present)

So what does that mean: It means that not only heating both layers wont be beneficial but it can even reduce DMT amount in solvent PER PULL (because you are pulling more of unwanted things along the dmt).
Like i said (i think): The only difference in yield would be from fats/oils present in the final product (if pulled with applied heat on both layers) which would give one the idea that he pulled more dmt, but it could actually be "dirtier" Dmt which would need further purification, while if we only heated the non polar (without the AQ layer(room temp)) we would not only get purer final product but there would be probabbly no need to further purify and you didnt have to waste time and energy to put up a water heatbath.

P.S. - Thank you for the replys i really appreciate it. Thumbs up
 
pete666
#9 Posted : 1/14/2019 4:36:22 PM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 892
Joined: 13-Jan-2018
Last visit: 14-Nov-2019
My experience is I get more with heated pull than with cold one. I am not a chemist, so I don't know the theoretical background.
This result is based on titration, not weight. So very likely mostly alkaloids are taken into consideration.
Acceptance of the fact that our reality is not real doesn't in fact mean it is not real. It just leads to better understanding what real means.
 
Psilosopher?
#10 Posted : 1/15/2019 6:37:37 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 742
Joined: 28-Dec-2014
Last visit: 05-Feb-2020
Location: Everywhen
Th Entity wrote:
Quote:
I keep the entire process at 60C
Thats cool but i bet you pull more oils/fats and unwanted material, and in some stages of the process i think thats unecessary. But whatever works for you. CTM suggest if using heat to break down plant proteins for more ionic strenght you should use 70C for hours.


I do pull more oils and fats, which to me is wanted material. I like more spirit in my spice. The fats and oils from the plant give the experience a living plant energy. Pure white xtals are very mechanical and alien. Still very cool and interesting, though. I guess it's just an acquired taste over the years.

And even if i wanted clean white xtals, i could always do a mini AB.

Th Entity wrote:
Quote:
More heat means more Brownian motion, which means more molecular collision. Reaction rate is hastened by heat.
That is true but you can use more water to compensate for the heat, and i dont think heating both the naptha and aq solution while pulling will give the most saturated pulls because the dmt would become more soluble in both liquids (even if freebase, thats what i read)
"solutes are more soluble in heated solvents (water/non polar)" The only reason why one would use heat after basification and during pulling is to achive faster separation of the layers and pull more stuff (fats,oils) This is the only reason that comes to mind. But the difference in the amount of DMT pulled with heat on both layers vs only heated nonpolar wont be dramatic if there is any at all, the only increase in yield from heating bothlayers would be from unwanted things like fats/oils.. i think, which would complicate things because you would have to do more cleaning later.


As i understand it (which could be wrong), the freebase DMT is not dissolved in the base solution. It's merely suspended in solution, floating free, hence the term. The moment it makes contact with the NPS, it jumps ship, dissolving into the more preferable solvent. So, in this case, the freebase DMT in the solvent is acting as a solute, creating a solution. Having more heat means that there are more chances for the DMT to jump ship into the solvent. This, plus the faster separation, is why i maintain the entire process at 60c.

I refrain from adding more water to the extraction, since it increases the working volume.

I've done both warm pulls and cold pulls. Warm pulls have always yielded more, regardless of how much i was mixing the cold one. I was even putting more effort into the cold pull, but it still yielded much less. However, the extra yield in the warm pulls could very well be just the oils/fats.


Th Entity wrote:
Quote:
i don't leave anything to chance. Overkill is better than no kill. There is no guarantee that every cell will be lysed from the freeze/thaw. Even the acid cook might not fully lyse the cells, depending on the texture of the starting material. The basification will reduce even semi-solid strips of bark into a sludgy mess, allowing better access to the juicy innards.


I think thats overkill heres why: First the bark is sliced to powder in high speed, beated to dust, then its heated in waterbath (max ion) then freeze/thawed 3x and then its boiled in acid and then
(if not filtered) its in high pH enviroment, and most of these are done over hours and hours.
Makes no sense to me to potentially contaminate final product with fats/oils and wasting time for
multiple cleaning steps (to remove those oils) later. And in the end it probabbly wont even increase the overall DMT pulled.


I don't always use powdered bark. I have a lot of bark that are chunks of solid strips, and quite difficult/annoying to powderise. I have to shred this plant material as finely as i can, which is nowhere near as fine as powdered. This affects yield dramatically, if using poor technique. With having plant material that is shredded and not powdered, a lot of the solvent and DMT can be trapped between the physical fragments of bark.

The goal is to maximise yield and efficiency. Sometimes, that means putting in more work. Those potential contaminations can be easily removed, which is an easy price to pay for a greater chance of more yield. The proper scientific method involves taking every variable into account, and minimising (or maximising) it's impact.

"And in the end it probabbly wont even increase the overall DMT pulled."

There is a massive difference in yield between shoddy technique and proper methodology. I've done both many times, shoddy is always shoddy. Shoddy, in this case, means either skipping "optional" steps, or doing the steps half-arsed.


Th Entity wrote:
You said it: More heat means more Brownian motion, which means more molecular collision.
Which one would guess means more dmt (overall or per pull) but is that the case?

Most solutes are more soluble in heated solvent (water/nonpolar) + heat more motion = more molecular collision (keep in mind that dmt present in bark is limited to 2-3% according to the information present)

So what does that mean: It means that not only heating both layers wont be beneficial but it can even reduce DMT amount in solvent PER PULL (because you are pulling more of unwanted things along the dmt)


I'm not sure this final part is correct. Since the solvent can be used ad infinitum, the amount of plant oils and fats being dissolved in the solvent is minuscule compared to it's holding capacity. Even the most yellow fat laden solvent can be used to pull DMT, with no noticeable effect on yield.

Th Entity wrote:
Like i said (i think): The only difference in yield would be from fats/oils present in the final product (if pulled with applied heat on both layers) which would give one the idea that he pulled more dmt, but it could actually be "dirtier" Dmt which would need further purification, while if we only heated the non polar (without the AQ layer(room temp)) we would not only get purer final product but there would be probabbly no need to further purify and you didnt have to waste time and energy to put up a water heatbath.


Believe me, i've had A LOT of failed extractions before i perfected my technique. When i deliberately experimented with bad technique (but still the correct method), i was getting less yields. I'm a firm believer in getting what you put out. Now, this is the point where this stops being scientific, but when i rushed the extraction or was using bad technique (or both), the trips i got from that yield were incredibly nonsensical at best, and really patronising at worst. Where DMT is like an ever disappointed parent in a child with extreme potential. "Both you and i could do so much more than this", along with such a pathetic lightshow, that it was painfully obvious.
"Better than a thousand hollow words, is one word that brings peace." - Buddha
 
Th Entity
#11 Posted : 1/15/2019 8:45:38 AM

I can't think of anything important or deep to add here, excuse me!


Posts: 348
Joined: 27-Oct-2018
Last visit: 22-Jul-2020
Location: The dream room, wonderland
Quote:
I've done both warm pulls and cold pulls. Warm pulls have always yielded more, regardless of how much i was mixing the cold one. I was even putting more effort into the cold pull, but it still yielded much less. However, the extra yield in the warm pulls could very well be just the oils/fats.


There is no question that warmer pulls will yield more than cold ones, im not saying they wont. Im talking where/how/when heat should be applied to maximise yield/efficiency and purity according to other threads and comments of chemists.

Quote:
I don't always use powdered bark. I have a lot of bark that are chunks of solid strips, and quite difficult/annoying to powderise. I have to shred this plant material as finely as i can, which is nowhere near as fine as powdered. This affects yield dramatically, if using poor technique. With having plant material that is shredded and not powdered, a lot of the solvent and DMT can be trapped between the physical fragments of bark.


In the Max Ion (which this post is based upon) one would be working with Powdered MHRB, i would personally never start with anything but powdered bark.

Quote:
There is a massive difference in yield between shoddy technique and proper methodology. I've done both many times, shoddy is always shoddy. Shoddy, in this case, means either skipping "optional" steps, or doing the steps half-arsed.


I agree, noone is talking about using shoddy technique.

Quote:
I'm not sure this final part is correct. Since the solvent can be used ad infinitum, the amount of plant oils and fats being dissolved in the solvent is minuscule compared to it's holding capacity. Even the most yellow fat laden solvent can be used to pull DMT, with no noticeable effect on yield.


Yes i would agree to some extent, here we have room for human error (heating both layers = alkaloids + fats/oils + their coloring = one could guess the solvent is saturated(based on color(which could be result of fats/oils) and pull it before saturation which could result in reduction of DMT in solvent PER PULL).

Psilosopher? and pete666 i thank you a lot for disscussing this i really appriciate that you came so we could have this talk.

I wanted to discuss the difference in result between heating both layers and heating only the non polar (so we pull with hot nonpolar and room temp basic AQ layer) the pro's and con's.

P.S. - Looks like DMT is like life in every aspect from extracting to smoking to experience its all perspective for everyone its different, Woah im fascinated. I guess its what ever works for one.

Good Luck see ya around the Nexus! Thumbs up






 
 
Users browsing this forum
Guest

DMT-Nexus theme created by The Traveler
This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.