>***I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING THAT IS DONE BECAUSE
>OF THIS POSE. IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE THEN PLEASE REFRAIN
>YOURSELF FROM READING THIS POST.***
Oh, trust me dawg - it's far, FAR more likely that something horrific will come of someone being foolish enough to believe the crap in my post, than someone being foolish enough to believe the crap in your post.
I disavow all responsibility for your actions.
>My questions are is there anyway that a test can be done
>to find out the chemical make up of this drug?
"A" test? ***"A"*** test?
The fact that you know even less about ghetto analytical chemistry than, yes, even I, fills me with a fear and dread unparalleled since the time my friend slit my throat, and I was grilling, dead, as God bitched me out for being a freakin' hippie.
Again, do I reiterate my disclaimer. No, there is unfortunately not "a test which will tell you the chemical makeup." There are a few techniques which will allow you to say "it is itself, and these are its properties." If it was a simple hydrocarbon, I'd say brominate the fucking thing and count carbon. You can probably still do that with it's pieces, once you blast a chunk to smithereens on the molecular level, and isolate "smithereens" from breakdown - i.e. "one compound believed to be a formerly-indolic clump" in one vial, "ethane" over here...
...it still won't tell you NEARLY as much as if it were just a nice, simple hydrocarbon which DIDN'T have, say, a tendancy to blast itself apart under most conditions of substitution, or, say, an amine which likes to halogenate more than it reasonably should, or...
...sorry, I'm rambling.
-------------------------------------------
Starting point :
...get your ass about 1/2 ton of these shrooms, and a giant freaking boiler. I am, quite literally, not shitting you. Mind you, this is probably felonious as fuck.
Step 2 :
Base out the alkaloids. Dose yourself. Still the same issues? Are you *sure* it's not just psychosomatic - trips can do that, y'know? If you *still* want to proceed...
Step 3:
Take a few pounds of yon alkaloids. Bust a little column chromatography under the blacklight.
"I know the drug is a tryptamine..."
Are you sure...?
POSITIVE???
Counterexample - sodium 2acetoxybenzoate is an a2 norepinephrine antagonist. As such, it is theoretically quite feasible that Na2AOB could *drastically* change an existing tryptamine-based experience, via the increased noradrenaline release, resulting in a potentially-negative, more potent tryptaminoid hallucinogenic experience.
I say this only because (a) I'm a fucking idiot, and (b) you appear to know even less than I do - 2acetoxybenzoic acid isn't a tryptamine, it's asprin.
...but... *IF* you still think you're sure...
...store the different glowing bands in different bottles, naturally, as you engage in a little column chromatography. *IF* you're right about the matter being tryptaminic, it is now in *one* of those bottles.
Step 4 :
Eat each bottle, one at a time. Note variances in nuance. Also, please be sane enough not to eat the whole bottle at once - this is for two reasons...
a) People munchin' the base of a full-fledged 2000 lbs of shrooms make very, very poor chemists for quite some time, and...
b) You need to save some for analysis.
...also, have your friends run double-blinds on your bioassay.
Step 5 :
Look up "boiling point constant h2o" on either TFSE or AFSE. This should tell you exactly how to determine the mol. wt. of your substance. *IF* you are correct, and it's a simple tryptamine, THIS WILL MAKE "WHAT-THE-FUCK-IT-IS" **SO** much easier to figure out. If it's "not quite a mild variance" - i.e., 'truly unknown compound,' then you will know that compound X has a mol. wt. of 'n', by tautology.
Step 6 :
"I know the drug is a tryptamine..."
Heh - still sure?
Well...
...in that case, run the Keller. If I named the wrong test, I'm sure someone will correct me. In fact, since I haven't read the whole thread, I'm sure someone has. Note the color for posterity...
Step 7 :
...you should have already tested the mp of the base, HCl, acetate, and any other acids you can get your hands on by now... record them *well* - as you record all other data.
Step 8 :
Check the literature - has anyone recorded anything with an identical crystalline structure (HCl, C2O2H4, CO2H2, etc), mp (HCl, C2O2H4, CO2H2, base, etc), reaction to the Keller test, mol. wt., etc, etc...
...if so, you *might* know what it is. Maybe. One never can be QUITE sure...
If not, you have "Compound X, mol wt n, mp (salt 1) (salt 2) (etc) bp (salt 1) (salt 2) (etc) notes : Keller test ___, flourescence noted under UV, and maybe some other notes."
This is enough for you to name a theoretically-completely-new-compound, earning your place in the annals of science for ages innumerable. It also gives you a JadedMerk ref for your theoretically-completely-new-compound.
...and if you're really, REALLY bright, you can think up potentially valid structures based on the theorized nucleus and the mol. wt. and test them based on the properties; methoxybenzene and parahydroxymethylbenzene, for instance, have a different reaction to MeI.
Have fun. Welcome to science, kid... and above all, don't listen to this idiot - yeah, the one typing the post, find someone who knows what they're doing...
