Hi Rubellus,

I've read with some attention your message, and humbly I'll say. I ask you to accept my
point of view fraternally. I'm not a Master and I don't want be it. I'm a scientist only and a
disciple of Hermes.
You say:
I wish tell you that in this private list all subscribers were selected by me as you was also.
So, these people understand alchemy and spagyrics some more and some less but all have
a great interest and some great knowledge.
Normally here we talk in plain language and we referred concrete facts in the modus
operandi.
I'm very sorry if maybe my language can be seem a little obscure for someone, but I don't
want be misunderstand. I'm a scientist, and I work in Alchemy with scientists, and in a
scientific manner. We are not "men of faith" (in latu sensum, of course), in a word we
must verify all the matter we obtain by Instrumental Analysis, and after try to understand
the complex mechanisms that involve transmutations. In this, I'm totally according with
your aims, when you say about "concrete facts". In this Philosophy, we've invest more on
this, setting up hi-tech supplied facilities. I don't want make confusion in this Community,
but only give a scientific contribution about a problem that I know more: the mechanism
of transmutation that change a matter from chemical to Alchemical and/or Spagyric.
When I tell you about Instrumental Analysis and about experimentation, I don't tell about
frivolities. These are concrete facts, much more "concretes" than show photographs with
reactions in flasks of any kind (this is absolutely NOT directed to you or to anyone of this
Group, of course...). In any case if this is necessary for the better comprehension of the
Group, I've enclose here little samples of the results we have join. I want you know this
because I've know more "Alchemists" around the world, and also the last, Solazaref, who
was after revealed like an impostor. He, you know, show apparent "miracles" but in
reality was only metallurgic chemistry (I can say it because in this I'm a real expert and
I've analyze all the matter resultants from his own work...). I'm very happy to be in your
Group and I hope to give to all members a real contribution by my humble knowledge in
Alchemy and Science.
Now, I go to the second point of your kind letter. You say:
Indeed, the fist Key the BV describe the gold purification by the antinomy and after
purified on a Coppell. In the second Key he describe as the "water" for to dissolve the
gold is made and in the third he describes the gold sulphur preparation like you can see
the image that I sent. After this, it is distilled with the "salt spirit sweeted" that is like the
ether chlorine.

It was write in plain language in the Testament but it presently isn't the goal of our
discussion nor the Kamala Jnana work of witch we will talk later. For us the main
problem for Solve of this path isn't the KOH but the native sulphur because the mercury
we can separate it from cinnabar by wet way.
I agree totally with your interpretation both of the "Twelve Keys" and of the "Testament".
This reveal that you know very good the real Way, not only Dry (like Fulcanelli,
Canseliet and French School want.) not only Wet (like a wrong modern
interpretation of ancient text want). I agree again your distinction of the Dry procedure
from the Wet procedure and also about the results.
But, Ill try to understand.
Indeed, the fist Key the BV describe the gold purification by the antinomy and after
purified on a Coppell.
About the First Key the Gold is purified by Antimony, and this is like I've personally
experimented. But I ask: what's the passage from the metallurgic Antimony to
Philosophical Antimony? We can reply the assation, but is it real? An Assation, in the
better manner is do (vacuum, controlled temperature, total respect of thermodynamics
parameters, right stirring, etc.see fig.1), maybe can growth the single grain by igneous
contribution, but not transform a metallurgic reality in a Philosophical reality (in a word,
can not regenerate the igneous structure of the Essence).

Fig. 1
Device for Assation of Antimony Ore
(its a modified Autoclave)

This means that there is much more in the process that involve the metamorphoses of the
matter. It can be that the real protagonist of First Key is the Gold, ok, but what Gold?
Metallurgic or Philosophical? Yes, because the passage from metallurgical/chemical to
Philosophical involve a real transmutation of the atomic lattice, a real quantum jump in

the structure of the orbital, a new level configuration and the difference is concretely
ascertainable by SLATER-KOSTER electronic structure calculation (fig. 2 and 2a). In a
word we have a Fifth Status of the Matter (I-solid, II-liquid, III-gaseous, IV-Plasma, VIgneous Matter or Alchemical). This is not theory, it's a laboratory results that can be
support by analysis and math models.
SLATER-KOSTER 3-CENTER PARAMETERS
ORTHOGONAL
FCC
s, s (000)
0.5476121306
1
x, x (000)
1.2858502865
2
xy, xy (000)
0.2765716314
3
d2, d2 (000)
0.2589738071
4
s, s (110)
-0.0666840151
5
s, x (110)
0.0725046769
6
s, xy (110)
-0.0482102595
7
s, d2 (110)
0.0286317971
8
x, x (110)
0.0797944441
9
x, x (011)
0.0040127914
10
x, y (110)
0.1100117490
11
x, xy (110)
-0.0520508513
12
x, xy (011)
0.0073714745
13
z, d2 (011)
0.0013858220
14
z, d1 (011)
0.0317319445
15
xy, xy (110)
-0.0378227942
16
xy, xy (011)
0.0096258139
17
xy, xz (011)
0.0097194724
18
xy, d2 (110)
0.0206267051
19
d2, d2 (110)
-0.0154998768
20
d1, d1 (110)
0.0254396480
21
s, s (200)
0.0052910647
22
s, x (200)
-0.0054482971
23
s, d2 (002)
0.0004896978
24
x, x (200)
0.0028100456
25
y, y (200)
-0.0142457690
26
x, xy (020)
-0.0006931470
27
z, d2 (002)
0.0009147825
28
xy, xy (200)
-0.0011198367
29
xy, xy (002)
0.0005638385
30
d2, d2 (002)
-0.0026646885
31
d1, d1 (002)
-0.0005153180
Au
Fig. 2
SLATER-KOSTER Analysis Gold like Chemical element

Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
Au
32

s, s (000)
x, x (000)
xy, xy (000)
d2, d2 (000)
s, s (111)
s, x (111)
s, xy (111)
x, x (111)
x, y (111)
x, xy (111)
x, yz (111)
x, d1 (111)
xy, xy (111)
xy, xz (111)
xy, d2 (111)
d2, d2 (111)
s, s (200)
s, x (200)
s, d2 (002)
x, x (200)
y, y (200)
x, xy (020)
z, d2 (002)
xy, xy (200)
xy, xy (002)
d2, d2 (002)
d1, d1 (002)
s, s (220)
s, x (220)
s, xy (220)
s, d2 (220)
x, x (220)
x, x (022)
x, y (220)
x, xy (220)
x, xy (022)
z, d2 (022)
z, d1 (022)
xy, xy (220)
xy, xy (022)
xy, xz (022)
xy, d2 (220)
d2, d2 (220)
d1, d1 (220)

0.8502643108
1.5687975883
1.0067180395
0.8536088467
-0.1039537787
0.0609278008
0.0509145334
0.0878070220
0.0464288592
0.0543909147
0.0616124906
0.0110936873
-0.0269698128
-0.0422266647
0.0017087661
0.0345529839
-0.0214504935
0.0585420243
-0.0637618080
0.1853738874
0.0360939428
0.0285655353
-0.1227772012
-0.0338917226
0.0091982670
-0.0699074045
0.0083759958
0.0191989932
-0.0195552129
-0.0188929364
-0.0094790971
-0.0108268633
0.0085968263
-0.0064367983
-0.0129375923
0.0037762644
0.0025070854
-0.0075719636
0.0185322389
-0.0002156120
-0.0017802733
0.0127331074
0.0047190716
-0.0041667987

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

Fig. 2a
SLATER-KOSTER Analysis The Philosophical Gold
(The symbol of the element doesnt appear because the Instrument dont recognize an association)

2. In the second Key he describe as the "water" for to dissolve the gold is made (...)

About the second Key, it's real: here we have the Water for the Gold dissolution. In our
Lab my staff have obtained it, and this is really different from any solvent (fig 3). It's in
solid status (dont wet the hands, like say Ancients) and resolve in liquid status when
heated with few degree up his temperature of crystallization. So, it is in a high reactive
status. In any case, it's extraordinarily stable and can dissolve the Gold about at room
temperature (we've do it in a Glow box controlled at 28C, like you can see in fig. 4). Can
you tell me about the physical-chemical characters of your result? It'll be appreciated.

Fig. 3
the "Water" of Basilius
(it's really different from Aqua Regia)

Fig. 4
the Glow Box for handle the Water of Basilius
(very sensitive to temperature)

In the next page, youll see the behavior of the substance, like Ive tell before.

Fig. 4a
The same Water under UV
The fluorescence state the high igneous character
of this matter

Fig. 4b
Always the Water after 3 minutes of exposure at
temperature of 25-26C
Its almost totally auto-resolved.

3. (...) and in the third he describes the gold sulphur preparation like you can see the
image that I sent.
About the photo you've send me, I thank you very much, and I ask you like you've
obtained this matter and if you've never try to analyze this substance and verify if it's a
simple chemical substance born from a conventional and reproducible reaction, or an
alchemical complex. I would like know more about, because I think you've join and
important result. Personally, in our lab we've insolate the Gold Sulphur according Basil
method, and we've obtained this (see fig. 5), which we've analyzed by MS (fig. 6). I must
say that this water of Basil act like a catalyst...

Fig. 5
Our Gold Sulphur

Fig. 6
MS result of G.S. Analysis

The ppm (parts per million dosages) state that only the impurities can be detected, all the
other matter is totally transformed. It's not a chemical substance and the MS can not
disaggregate it in its chemical constituents.
4. After this, it is distilled with the "salt spirit sweeted" that is like the ether chlorine.
About the "salt spirit sweeted" identified like ether chlorine..., are you saying about the
density? In a word, volatile like ether chlorine, or really in the structure similar to ether
chlorine, or again IS ether chlorine(!) ? Or maybe, youre talking about ether chloride?
I would like know this, because I know very good this substance and it's really different
from ethers of any kind.
Let's quickly look at the structure and properties of ethers. There is generally a 110 degree
angle from carbon to oxygen to the next carbon. Molecules of this class are slightly polar.
The small ones are soluble in water; the large ones are not. They generally are very
volatile liquids; the small ones are extremely so.
Ethers are formed by a type of intermolecular dehydration in which two alcohol
molecules are joined together. An example of this is shown here
+

H
R O R + H O H
R O R + H O R

In this example there are two alcohol molecules which are shown without specifying what
alcohols they are by using R to represent alkyl groups. The prime mark on the R in the
second alcohol just indicates that it is not necessarily the same group as is in the first
alcohol. Note that acid and heat are used in this reaction. These are the same conditions
that were necessary for the intermolecular dehydration used to make esters.
They are also the same conditions that were used in the intramolecular dehydration of
alcohols to form alkenes a few lessons ago. So this reaction will be competing with the
formation of alkenes from the dehydration of individual alcohol molecules.
+

H
R O H + H O R'
RO R+ H O H

H
R O H
ALKENE

H+

H O R' ALKENE

Whether you get an ether, an alkene, or a mixture of both along with the original alcohol
or alcohols will depend on such things as the concentration of water, concentration of
acid, and the temperature.
These types of factors are very important when you get into synthesizing something from
an alcohol. Usually, you get mixtures of various products from any organic reaction. This
is true even though we can write an equation, that shows only one product.

Ethers will burn very quickly when ignited. Ethers are generally volatile and
flammable. At room temperature ethers react in air to form unstable peroxides. The
peroxides they make when exposed to air are explosive. Consequently, we re crazy if we
do any Alchemical Lab work with them. When kept away from air, they seem to be
somewhat inert. There are no simple tests that I know of that can be performed to identify
the presence of an ether in an unknown. They behave very much like alkanes in that
sense, except that they are polar molecules; and the alkanes are nonpolar.
The Salt Spirit sweeted is totally different. It have a more high density, it's not organic
but metallorganic, its not flammable and it's really sweet tasting (fig. 7 and fig. 8). And
about the bond chemistry there is more to discuss.
Its much more near an oil, but really different in the behavior, because the different
origin and more repeated cohobation have generate in the structure a real transformation.

Fig. 7
The Salt Spirit Sweeted

a- chlorine ether

b- Salt Spirit Sweeted

Fig. 8
comparative IR-RAMAN analysis btw ether chlorine & Salt Spirit Sweeted

The question now it is the alkahest. What mean the alkahest in Spagyrics or Alchemy?
Yes, but the mean is different for Spagyrics AND for Alchemy (not one OR the other...).
In Spagyrics we've Mestruums, very, very different from Alkahest, because fine acid
composes, or solvents from three Kingdoms (spagyrically obtained..., about 120) for the
extraction of Tria Prima Compositum from whose, after, we'll obtain the single
Principles. In Alchemy, like you say thinking to Van Helmont, all authors IMO they
refer it as an universal dissolvent that allow to separate from any metal his sulphur.
And again, you say:
Some authors give us some "formulae" for made it as Van Helmont did.
But, I ask: what's the constitution of this matter? Is it an Acid? Is it a Compose? no, it's a
simple matter, structurally autonomous, highly igneous (and if it's no detailed and so
obscure: with an high free energy of reaction), with an high reactivity to the metallic
Kingdom. If I distill this liquid, it don't condensate and don't pass both in the capitel (if I
use the traditional method) and in the condenser or in the Schlenk flask (if I use modern
methods and hi-vacuum line). This again is not theory, is concrete experimentation (I
repeat, and take this like a humor moment in this serious discussion, I don't want be a
Master and I don't want substitute nobody in this; I want only say that my results are not
chemicals....:-)
Go over...:
What Van Helmont says? That "his" alkahest is made with the urine salt or be a
ammonium carbonate but missing anything because the ammonium carbonate "per se"
isn't a metal dissolvent.
I agree totally. We have tell about un-distillable character of the Alkahest, yes?

Well, a lot of people have distilled M-Tons of every kind of Vitriol confusing them with
the Alkahest. Result? Nothing.... If I made the Alkahest simply by urine salt or an
ammonium carbonate, I don't obtain absolutely nothing of alchemical. The first, because
urine salt is a complex salt of ammonium nitrate (1,5%) and ammonium chloride (about
98.5%) by organic origin, in a word, its reaction kinetics is very, very, and say again very
slow, because the igneous presence (the energy I've tell before) is insufficient to open the
metallic structure. Much more is for ammonium carbonate. The presence of Carbonate
segment inhibit any igneous affinity making a low energy base. Can you explain me, like
it's possible make from an organic derivation salt an Alchemical reality (the Alkahest)
that, according Authors, destroy the same recipient which contain it?
In the past Time, only normal glass was know, gres and tin copper but we've observe that
also Pyrex is totally wear out. Only Quartz and Teflon resist. (want photo? see for this fig.
9)

Fig. 9
Glass corrosion after only 5 seconds of surface attack with the Alkahest weve obtain. You can see the
condition of the sample.

Alkahest is like Van Helmont describe, but not literally, I repeat. Urine Salt is another
think than the chemicals, it's an Alchemical reality. Maybe the same salt totally
transformed (you know what's the acronym of URINE).
Some authors add to the ammonium carbonate the wine spirit and distill but it not
dissolve any metal.
I agree again, totally. But what's Wine Spirit of Ancients? What's this Ammonium
carbonate according Ancient Authors? Nothing of Chemical. All of us have not the
Authority for say: "The methods of ancients is wrong because I've try to mix this and this
again, and I've obtain nothing". All of us must understand what's difference between
chemical reality and Alchemical Reality. The first is linked to physic-chemical matter
parameters and thermodynamics law, the second is like the first, yes, but is the condition
of superior causes that make intimate transformation in the quantum structure of the

matter, out of the conventional space-time reality and physic range. Again, this is not unconcrete affirmation, but derive from Lab experimentation and experience.
Some modern authors and the ancient too claim to made the alkahest but until now I not
see concrete facts only many book references and theoretically concepts!
Some moderns maybe, yes, but the Ancient have made the Alkahest. All is write, it's
necessary read in a Philosophical (Alchemical) manner. Its necessary, before, acquire the
CODE which no books and no Masters have never tell. This CODE is the key, and its
not in the phonetic cabala or in any other conventional manner of decrypting. And its so
astonishing so this is hide, and also.UN-TRANSMISSIBLE. Its enclose in the
experience. Its Direct. For this, its necessary work more in Lab experimentation and,
over all, start to see the matter we obtain in their own real nature. This can be do through
Analysis. If anyone obtain always chemicals, it mean hes not in an Alchemical way.

Fig. 10
The Alkahest weve obtain, during the intermediate phase of preparation.
The apparatus is entirely constructed in Quartz, because, when the reaction is completed and it tone to
transparent color, the aggressive character is immediately show

We could like see any modern alchemist tell us: "I do the true alkahest and show us the
pics. and the results". Was for this that this list was created. Discuss concrete facts
theoretically and the practically.
And I agree again. And this must be do from everyone, with own means. No important if
they are scientists or no. It's important be honest the first. I've never say: "I do the true
alkahest".
In our Research Institute we have obtain a kind of Alkahest, we think it's so because
experimentation have demonstrate us more interesting phenomena, but we must work

more about. I've describe something in the precedent mail and I agree to do it again, and
give to the Group more details about.
When in my letter I write: "If I analyze the Alkahest post-reaction, I find only the
Alkahest again and some little impurities. In any case, when I separate the Principia, the
Paracelsiana Tria Prima, I see that these substances are new bodies, new realities. Not
chemicals, not simply composes, but a new reality founded on high igneous matter
concentration, which the atomic density is particularly interesting"; when I write this my
intention isnt to confuse others. Im REALLY plain in my words, because I've also
included the result of a MS analysis (see fig. 11)

Fig. 11
MS analysis of presence of impurities in Alkahest
(the Alkahest have totally dissolved the metal and embrionally keep in itself the metal Sulphur that will
release in a second time)

I believe only in the measurement results and in Lab work. I know that many people
prefer that Alkahest is not discovered and scientifically documented, because there is a
business in publications, courses and seminars; all do for make confusion and.lot of
money. If anyone want so, ok, but the step of honest Alchemy and the steps of honest
Science will be not stop. More of discoveries in our Institute are not mine and I'm only a
spokesman, a witness, of the works of brilliant group of free scientists. This is only a
humble contribution with a point of view based on experimentation and scientific
approach.
Many years ago, in the message board of mr. McLean Site, mr. H. Shoran, our P.R.
Manager, was start to transmit more results from researches of Lavairire and other
modern Alchemist working in a scientific background. It was a disaster, and he was

attacked and offended by some incompetent people. Logically, in that place the only
interest is not the Alchemy but maybe the intellectual exercise.
I give you my best compliments because in this Group there are all honorable persons.
I hope you'll allow me to continue to share in your Group, Im here for learn more and
share more of our works and I hope to be always a good help for anyone want, without
see in me a teacher. I'm not and I don't want be it. Everyone want, can also find me
privately to: lrlabs@supereva.it.
fraternally, Frank Burton