5A8R3 wrote:A magnetic stirrer is definately on my wishlist.
It reminds me of other spiritual centres, such as buddhist temples, who also ask for a fee. Always baffled me that one should pay for enlightenment when at the centre of buddhist teaching is that the answers are within you, or rather, without you.
You are wise AcaciaConfusedYah.
As a chemist you choose the STB method? I was looking into FASA...
Hey 5A8R3!
I don't know about wise... wise-ass, yes! But wise... lol I've still got much to learn.
Yes, I think we're of similar opinions about spiritual centers. I am biased, but that is likely due to the stubborn approach of "well... if my spirituality needs fixing, then only I can determine that." If someone else tells me that i'm not the "right kind of spiritual" then i'm likely to be even more weary of that person. My life is spiritually. There is no separation - so I don't find value in paying others to tell me something that does not relate to my personal path. That being said, if others want to pay someone for those suggestions, then that is their choice, and I respect their choice to choose!
In my experience - I learn the most when I am "wrong." Extractions, school, work, family - you name it. If I'm told something without relation to a life event, then it's hard for me to understand the value in the message. If I struggle, then it kicks in that stubborn mind and I take an approach to learn the application. Often this results in a lot of trial and error; though it is nice when someone else has tried something, had errors, recorded the errors, found a solution, documented the solution, and offered it via open-source. Even if their merhod is not completely compatible with my resources (equipment, chems, etc) I try to interpolate and reconfigure so that the concept can be applied. I've learned a lot more from being "wrong" than being "right." If I'm "right," then that means I haven't got a complete understanding. If I'm "wrong," that too, means I don't have a complete understanding; but it means I recognize the fault and I am trying to improve it.
As far as method - I've tried many! The FASA approach is great for folks who are using d-limonene or xylene; or they wish to have DMT fumarate for oral use. I generally use an acid titration approach for mescaline, due to the salt being more desirable. For DMT, I favor freebase, so the FASA method is not as useful for my choice of end result. I think the FASA and d-limo approach is great for people who do not have access to a vacuum chamber / reduced pressure. They can use a food safe solvent (safe if ingested) and food grade fumaric acid. This means that the residual solvent or acid won't be problematic for the user.
I do favor STB for simple extractions. I've tried many different variations of extractions and I've enjoyed learning about all of them! I've extracted alkaloids from plant matter more than i'll openly admit, but 90% of those experiments were motivated by curiosity rather than the actual substance. It is a... hobby? I dunno that sounds funny
---"So Mr. ACY, what do you like to do in your free time?" ____ "Drugs."_____"Drugs???"_____"Wait, no, i should elaborate, I just enjoy the chemistry of drugs."_____***person asking question raises a concerned eyebrow*** "Um... you really shouldn't make meth... you've seen the "labs" blow up, right?"_____"No, no, no - not meth!! It's nothing like that. It's more like...hmmm... 'natural' drugs... yah know?"_____"Our company has a strict policy against marijuana growing, I'm sorry, we cannot consider you as a candidate..."____***ACY facepalms*** "yeah, of course. Good thing I don't grow it..."_____"Yes, Susan? Can you call security? It appears as though we have another 'one of them,' again. Thanks!.... So, Mr. ACY, would you like a bottle of water? This next part is going to be very uncomfortable. How do you feel about being escorted out of the building by 5 large men?"_____"I have legs. No escorts needed. Keep your water. I've got plenty in my car... See Yah!" ***Bolts the hell outta there***
Ok, that's never happened. It's just how I imagine it happening IF it did.
Back on track - yes, STB for ease and simplicity. The more I tried to make things complicated.. the more complicated things became! STB is simple and can be executed via minimal resources. It's the most popular extraction method, so I had usually overlooked it. I used to think that a more complicated method was "better" than a simple method. My thought was: Why would someone complicate something if there were not a need to complicate? From this perspective, I assumed an STB was inferior - "it's too simple. If it were the best approach, then people would not have designed the more complicated teks."
WELL, remember what I said about being wrong and right? When I'm wrong, I learn more. So, I set out to discover my level of wrongness. When I realized that I was wrong, I began to wonder about the procedures that are presented, here. I started asking, "why do we do this, or that?" I'm still not "right," but I'm moving in a direction that I feel is beneficial.
I looped back around to the STB after learning more about chemistry. The thing I had most questions about was the concept of "excess." I had learned about pH and the contributing factors, and I started wondering if the "kill it with lye" approach is really needed. From my findings: no, not at all. I actually found that less lye made the separation of the aqueous and organic layer occur at a faster rate.
I wondered why some people say, "do eleventy-billion 0.0005 mL pulls, and make sure its heated... hey anyone know why i'm getting poor yields and lots of goo?" So, i tried a single, large pull at room temp.... wtf? "Why am I getting better results from doing this, and saving way more time and a lot less hassle?"
I still don't understand the purpose of 7x 50 mL pulls. It doesn't make sense to me. So, lets assume that you have 100% available for extraction. Let's assume that each pull will remove a decreased % of the total alks per ratio of volume. There are 500 mg total. Each 50 mL pull can only remove 20% of the total alkaloids. First pull - leaves 400 mg; second leaves 320 mg; third leaves 256 mg; fourth leaves 204.8 mg; fifth leaves 163.84, sixth leaves 131.072 mg; 7th leaves 104.86 mg. So, from 500 mg and 7 pulls, ~395 mg retrieved.
Ok, same scenario, two large pulls. Each pull removes 80% DMT from the total mix. First pull: 100 mg remains in soup; second pull: 20 mg remains in soup. Total collected: 480 mg DMT.
So, comparing the two: which seems more preferred? Multiple, small, less efficient pulls? Or 2 big ones that get the job done faster and with a better return? It's not as simple as my example - or... maybe it is. I mean... why would there be a more complicated approach if the simple one doesn't "work?" This will continue to baffle me... but, hey... why not?? Lol. If someone wants to do more work for a lower return, then that's their choice, IMO. I'll share the findings of my experiments, but at the end of the day, I won't enforce my ideals. Most people will ignore it, anyways. Lol. Especially after this wall of text. It took so much to say so little. Over complicated explanation? Likely.
The simple reply would be: "figure it out through experimenting." That's what I did.
Take care!
ACY
Edit: In hindsight - maybe the multiple small pull approach is a hidden way to get people to slow down and stop rushing. That makes more sense, actually. Ignore what i said about time efficiency and ease. I get it, now. How many times have I seen the post, "I added lye, added NPS, stirred for 2 minutes and 45 seconds... no dmt??? Why???" So, maybe the multi-pull is a secret buffer to keep the rushed from rushing. I had never considered that, as I had always felt that rushing it would result in problems.
(Oops! You got promoted, it seems. Someone probably tossed you an "accidental" vote. Enjoy the forum.
)
Sometimes it's good for a change. Other times it isn't.