beautiful

[SHORTY]

Some water.  I didn't dry it and although the can says 100%, i know that it's not.

As far as washing the xylene, no i didn't wash it because i figured if any of the methanol was present then it might contain some of the pseudo and could bee lost by washing, but i don't know for sure.

I also assumed that any gaaks which were in the xylene would stay there throughout the procedure. 

I think ill allow that xylene to evap and see what is left when its gone.  Has anybee ever done this?  Geez, have you done this yet?

[wareami]

for the interuption fellow bees....
Ibee has been saying all along to utilize the h2o present in most solvents to your advantage.
Pfed loves water.
This is why the IDEA method worked against the DryMatrix without activating the drymatrix. Buffers exist to utilize some chems to their maximum efficiency.
It didn't icorporate any homegrown driedsolvents.Everything straight out the can.
When bees can they should use the universal solvent properties of h2o.
Ibee is working on a way to use h2o to wash solvent mixtures prior to exposing the PM to the mix.
Might be promising, we'll see.
Carry on....

[geezmeister]

I also assumed that any gaaks which were in the xylene would stay there throughout the procedure.

You discuss gassing the xylene and obtaining the pseudo, then dissolving the gassed pseudo in alcohol. You may do this by adding alcohol to the xylene, or you may filter the pseudo HCl out of the xylene and then dissolve it. If the latter is correct, you would have an opportunity to wash the xylene of dirt and other gakks before precipitating the pseudo in it. That was the thrust of my question.

I also assumed that any gaaks which were in the xylene would stay there throughout the procedure.

What concerned me was the fact that other gakks will precipitate out of the xylene just as pseudo does, but at ower temperatures. When you allow the pseudo to settle to the bottom of the xylene to avoid filtering, allowing you to decant the xylene, it cools enough that the pseudo that falls out after the first batch was filtered hot also has precipitated, and by then some gakk (the stuff that makes your filters sticky?) may also have precipitated.) I may not understand your process completely, or you may get it done while the xylene is still very hot. otherwise, you might be reintroducing some inactives into your pseudo that would not be there if you went ahead and filtered while the xylene was hot-- i.e., you assumption that other gakks will remain in the xylene may not be accurate.

I have not evapped xylene down to see what gakks it contains, but if you let it sit you will discover that by the time it gets to room temp, a layer of brownish residue and powder is at the bottom. This seems to me to be cellulose and some thing else that came out in my cleaning.

Ware: I knew you were going to mention denatured for the water in it. I started my experiment with 91% ISO and had some denatured on hand. I may try using it to mobilize the base in a tetra trap. When I used the Iso, I added it to the gups, then added the naptha to extract with. I did not pour the alcohol through the naptha into the gups.

[SHORTY]

Sorry geez, when i said i allow it to settle i meant that after bringing the xylene to 105C (or a little higher) i remove from heat and wait maybe 30 seconds for any needles to settle.  I then decant the xylene and the majority of the pseudo stays on the bottom of the beaker.  As the last of the xylene leaves the beaker a few needles will come with it but not enough to bee concerned with.  The xylene is no less than 95C when decanted.  When the acetone is added it will boil for a few seconds without additional heat due to the beaker still being warm. 

The decanted xylene starts to precipitate what looks like snot or clouds of gaak about 5 minutes after being poured off.  When completely cool the cloud has filled the xylene and will eventually settle to the bottom.

I started decanting the xylene rather than filtering because no matter how hot i filtered it i would have shit in the bottom of the filter.  Sometimes it was orangish color but i am not sure what it is.

[spectralshift]

I disagree. Getting the pseudo without getting anything else is the whole point, and orange isn't the only enemy.

That's right, I'm not disputing that, what I intended the remark to mean was that an A/B won't pull much except pfed (nothing that can't bee dealt with), and so yield and thorough basification is the primary concern in this phase.

Orange is the enemy that you have said has plagued many of the cooks in your area, more than any other.

Sometimes you don't break down problems in simple terms in your mind.
As soon as I got an understanding of what orange was and how it worked, after asking specific questions, then I only had to ask of myself - how do i transfer as much of that pfed to an organic layer? How can I give it the best chance?

Your ISO experiment probably fucked up because the shells were of the rock solid variety that don't dissolve in tone, DCM, but love alcohol.  

A 10:90 or 20:80 composite of water:alcohol is good, but we think it for different reasons, in part. It's for it's miscibility that is the key to phase transfer, in the event of an orange explosion... and as Shorty has seen it can carry across rubbish.

You won't get much miscibility with a ratio in favour of water as the alcohol will bee in the water layer.

The alcohol in my mind has nothing to do with a fear of water, it has to do with a greater miscibility than water to assist in transferal.
I don't submit to the no water rule you and ware have led people to believe is necessary to avoid horrible drama's.

As I now have been informed that in fact a dilute acid boil will precipitate out cellulose hydrogels and PEG.
Nevertheless, as you know I'm still traumatised by your (the both of you), I now fear balonial speeches and anti-h2o 'gander and don't use it for certain purposes. I'm only just starting to see the truth in practice...It doesn't look good you two...

Tetra's presence in the GUPs initially prevents the water from activating the gels and other water-activated gakks that would otherwise be yield killers.

No it doesn't, the heating step kills that idea. Your pills must bee weak and contain none as a thick layer of bloby modules of hydrogel will form on heating of the water, as it's been witnessed.

You've got selective hearing/reading, because just the other day not surprisingly a bee spoke of this very problem.

You need to wash the separated, pfed laden NP's with water, to remove that 'a little bit soluble in non-polar but very soluble in water' stuff.  

You also should boil with the extraction solvent as a pre-wash, as Rag/org has said a few days ago, tricks that I already worked out.

[wareami]

Geez: Some alcohol solvents and NP solvents are more compatible with others.
Misibility plays a large role...
Ibee has been working with both 70% iso and 91% iso as well as denat and sofar the 70% is heading the pack in experiments where the polymers and other gaaks have been stabilized with the use of exotic chems.
Similar to attacks and assaults you bees are subjecting the GUPs to with the solvent soaks and boils.
The key point seems to bee that once the active polymers/gaaks have been immobilized, they don't provide as much threat in aqueous solution or basic environments.
Since the main difference between 70%-91% isopropyl alky is h2o content, Ibee can safely draw the conclusion that the water is the attractant for the pfed, provided the other gaaks are held at bay.
Sometimes the ingredients used in denatured alky do that, but in purer alky's Ibee's seeing a direct correlation to h2o content in those various srengths.
There was a time when it was thought the safest way to GO in frontside extraction was to dry all solvents.
Maybe not so anymore.
Just a suggestion but you might want to see what the 70% iso has to offer in addition to comparing them to denat, methanol, or just h2o.

[geezmeister]

shorty: I did misunderstand part of your post. You may well have success at 95C with xylene. At that temperature using naptha alone, the pseudo that precipitated after filtering the naptha was laced with gakk. At approx 90C the substance that was precipitiating was not pseudo, and looked much the same as the cellulose that precipitates in decanted acetone after a boil of the pill mass. I haven't measured the temps at which other compounds precipitate in xylene, but I assume most would precipitate at a lower temperature in xylene than in naptha.

Ware: I concur in the notes about different alcohols having different miscibilities and characteristics as a solvent. You are probably correct about the water content not being an absolute, although I remain of the opinion that some pill formulations are designed to foil an alcohol extraction of pseudo from the pill mass with OTC alcohols containing moisture. The waterless approach countered that objective, perhaps at the cost of some yield but with a savings in time-to-pseudo, which is important for a good many weekend warriors who can't spend for pills until Friday and want meth sometime over the weekend. The LWR pretty much eliminated that consideration, and since I adopted that approach, pill gathering for a cook is done at a least a week prior to the cook itself, and fast extracation is no longer an issue. It remains an issue with many cooks.

spectralshift: You tell me that an a/b will pull little but pseudo, yet in another post reminded me that the waterless a/b was ineffective against orange. The STB method and the waterless a/b both did not deal with the orange problem adequately. Both also predated it. I ventured along familiar paths in trying to solve the orange gakk problem. Your method of using larger amounts of water and giving time for gels to dissolve precludes cooking pseudo the same weekend as you acquire the pills, and many cooks are accustomed to doing this. The mental framework that accompanies the task-oriented, time conscious cook helps keep him from seeing outside the box of his routine experience. I applaud your approach, which I would not have thought to pursue because of the blinders created by my experience and approach to meth making in general. When I encountered the first orange gakk, I ventured along familiar paths searching for a workaround. Do not fault me for trying familiar approaches while trying to identify the new enemy. You commented that "As soon as I got an understanding of what orange was and how it worked," you began searching for new ways to overcome it. And how long did it take you? Congratulations. You got an understanding of what it is and how it works well before I did, and I am sorry I did not have the same perceptive ability or chemistry knowledge you have. I have to hack along on weekends, guessing at what might work and learning from failures. Its not the best approach, but it often results in solutions. 

The very-watery a/b approach is different in kind and character from the extraction processes used by most cooks I know, who have for years extracted pills as a more or less start-to-finish operation from pill acquisition to  use in a reaction. The idea of doing this and waiting, then doing that and waiting, and then later doing this-- is not an approach within the conceptual range of most cooks. There were similar debates here a couple of years ago between those who viewed long solvent soaks at room temperature as being preferable to solvent boils. Some claimed to clean the dirtiest pills with nothing more than soaks in room temperature tolulene, while others professed an inability to extract clean pseudo without boiling the pill mass in at least some of several solvents.

The very watery a/b, with or without a boil after being dropped to pH2, employs a different approach to extracting pseudo. The difference lies as much in the time frame allotted for the process as in the process itself. If your modus operandi allowed you to purchase pills on Friday afternoon but dictated that you react the pseudo starting no later than one or two o'clock the following morning, your method would be "outside the box" most cooks found themselves thinking in. It would not occur to them to enlist time as an ally, as their concept of extracting pseudo views it as an active process, not a passive one.  Given your time allowance and approach, the recommendations I have routinely made against using water in pill extraction were inaccurate. When I started making those recommendations, they were appropriate to extractions from pills which had new-at-that-time water-activated gakks. Thoise recommendations remained for the most part valid guides until new gakks, some perhaps selected to foil waterless approaches, were introduced in the pills. 

The 120's I extracted from, by the way, were Perrigo generics, not the "hard shells" you described. I had good yields, and the pseudo I obtained was PEG and Orange free. Yes, I have pills that have problems with hydrogels. I used pills that a standard water-based extraction would have failed on. I am familiar with the nature and purposes of washing the pseudo laden nonpolar solvent and quite familiar with the point of boiling with the solvent you choose to extract prior to extracting. I fail to see the point you are evidently trying to make.  (I can't tell whether you are wanting to issue some challenge to me, or if you just have trouble expressing yourself without sounding insulting. I've declined what I considered as such challenges before, and don't have any particular reason to spend my time sparring with you over the internet when I have many other things which are more interesting, and a good deal more challenging, to do.)   


There appears to be more than one way to skin this cat. The tequila fanciers among us seized on Scottdog's recognition of a phase shift point in the a/b process where the pseudo and the orange could be separated, as you did with the water boils of the freebase crystals. The latter approach needs to have its weaknesses in pseudo loss addressed, and with that still offers a good route to the clean pseudo goal for those whose circumstance or lack of planning leave them short of the time your method needs to prepare for a cook. 

You do not subscribe to the waterless approach as you have found an approach that solves the water activated gels another way. Fantastic. Glad the masses can be freed from the hypocrisy and idiotic presumptions that got us through the period between the time that then-current concepts of water-based extraction failed and waterless methods provided clean pseudo. At least it worked. And frankly, with modifications, for those who lack the time to wait, it still does. It is a different approach conceptually, but it really is nothing more than another approach to extracting pseudo mixed with water-activated gels.

I've never been set in stone in anything I have done, and I have have never been impervious to change. I have done what I can with most new extraction techniques to test them and find their weaknesses and help find workarounds for those weaknesses. 

You made the comment: "I'm still traumatised by your (the both of you), I now fear balonial speeches and anti-h2o 'gander and don't use it for certain purposes. I'm only just starting to see the truth in practice...It doesn't look good you two..." If anything I did here traumatized you, my good fellow, you best not visit the American southwest. You won't make it long here if something I did traumatized you. As to what doesn't look for the two of us, I assume you mean Ware and I. If you think I have my self esteem tied up in this nym or this board, you are sadly mistaken, and if you assume that Ware or I either one have some sacred ground to defend, you are evidently delusional. Stop looking for conspiracies and accept that a lot of cats get skinned for no good reason, and that those who keep up with pseudo extraction know we are always learning and changing our methods to adapt.

If you ever have a chance to figure out why Zyrtec D shells confound the very watery a/b approach and refuse to settle out, be filtered, or quit jacking with the extraction, pass it on. Their white coating does some nasty things in water, acting a lot like glue. I still get some of these pills from time to time and want to see how your method works with them. My last effort was pretty much a wash-- the pseudo I obtained was clean enough, but I obtained very low overall yields. I have a few thoughts on how to proceed, but think I will leave solving this problem to you, and stick to things I know something about.

[spectralshift]

You tell me that an a/b will pull little but pseudo, yet in another post reminded me that the waterless a/b was ineffective against orange.

no I didn't say anything of the sort.

Geez stop this, your B.P. has got to bee getting out of hand, Ill respond to the rest after.  

P.S.
Your method of using larger amounts of water and giving time for gels to dissolve precludes cooking pseudo the same weekend as you acquire the pills, and many cooks are accustomed to doing this

This is entirely made-up rubbish aswell, I do not advocate a lot of water to remve orange. I dont know where you pulled this from.


You commented that "As soon as I got an understanding of what orange was and how it worked," you began searching for new ways to overcome it. And how long did it take you? Congratulations. You got an understanding of what it is and how it works well before I did, and I am sorry I did not have the same perceptive ability or chemistry knowledge you have. I have to hack along on weekends, guessing at what might work and learning from failures. Its not the best approach, but it often results in solutions.


This isn't true, I didn't even study chemistry at high school level, and I hack things from bits of knowledge. I might have been reading a lot about chemistry in the first 1-2 monthes at the Hive, but then turned back to the ghets and forgot 80% of it!  


more comments to come, some positive im sure.  

[dwarfer]

Username:  spectralshift
Title:  Hive Bee
Subject:  Misinterpritation
As I now have been informed that in fact a dilute acid boil will precipitate out cellulose hydrogels and PEG.

Has it been your experience that this in fact works??
Pardon my skepticism. 

Please describe how this is accomplished.
================

[spectralshift]

It's pretty simple really. Boil pills in a healthy-sized bath of plain water, (you'll get great dissolution, unlike with NP's and dry solvents that have been essential)
Remove any precipitation from boiling, hot, and cold, as it will always have pfed dissolved.

Then do the same but with either a splash of vinegar or several drops of hcl, but bee careful. experience is light on, but for very respectable bees have told me about it.
 
But the following is right there in black and white in the merck index, which you have both, I fear had for a long time.

1. Hydroxypropyl Cellulose - precipitates@45-50C Plain water (no acid)

2. Microcrystalline Cellulose - insoluble in dilute acids.

3. Hydroxypropyl Methyl cellulose - insoluble in plain hot water

4. Methylcellulose - insoluble in hot water [dispersed and stabilised by hot water with stirring]

I think the floating clear solutions are PEG. Relatively certain.
They are gak and are easily drawn up with an eye dropper.


Another thing, ware about DOT3, I think your the bullshitter and merely trying to back your old friend up because, geez doesn't wash his NP's with water in any of the procedures I can see.

I doubt then that they "change polarity" either.

I did those extra tests too, on DOT3, the ethylene glycols fall right back out with fresh water.

But glycol ether also works.
=================

[wareami]

I am quite the bullartist at times

http://dreamers.gr/pics/newpics/moo.jpg

See...I'm beeing serious here! I didn't post the pic?
_{I can hear it now..."OHH NOO..The Martians Got Ware again!"}
But I'm like old George Washington when it comes to extraction, I cannot tell a lie!
All the smokescreens and mirrors in the world aren't going to cover UP the fact that your proposal is lacking one important element here...
Do you remember 1-2months ago I asked that you slap together a write-up compiling an effective work around for the problems at hand as they deal with OrangeII gaak and other hydrogels/polymers?
Well I'm still waiting.
Bits and peaces are all well and good and maybe it's beyond your scope in practice to put your money ware your mouth is.
I'm not bustin on ya....but I keep reading suggestions from your corner without any hard demonstrations that will provide bees with some relief via a write-up.
It's not easy doing all the research AND the hands on experimentation that verifies that indeed you have a solution.
I can Theorize and hypothesize my ass off with the best of them, but when it comes down to applicability and practicality, yer shyte better fly because bees are investing money, time, and energy in making what was proposed work.
Geez is 110% correct regarding the sentiments and philosophies he expressed on OUR behalf.

Now onto the brakedown you graciously provided us with.(And yes...Ibee has the merck 13th ed and the crc handbook of chemistry and physics)
You are breaking down each component that comprises a matrix and finding solubility and addressing each separately.
While that looks good on paper, those individual chems were selected to bee married for several reasons. More are beeing added all the time.
The main reason was to thwart the logical/likely approaches you've outlined.
I know Geez and he and Ibee have beat this shit every which way feeasibly possible for clandestine chemhacks and hit more brickwalls than workable solutions.
The speed at which bees get handed successful workaraounds might indicate this shyte is a piece of cake to combat...but those come from the collective efforts that don't detail the individual frustrations each faces. That's not counting the money lost either.
With that said....it should be easy to see by the track record here at the hive that an atmosphere that breeds the most success is not one of challenging one another but made of collaboration and collective teamwork.
So please put together a write-up after putting into practice a workable solution that incorporates your findings if you care to contribute your time and labor to the ongoing collective efforts.
As I said, I'm not bustin on ya...
But this is keepin Ibee from typin UP his latest findings that might be the "Happy GO Lucky" discovery he's been painstakingly slaving over for months that might fend off the nightmares on the pillfront temporarily!

Hey....one more thing here that's gone left unsaid til now.
All you bees might be wondering why more support is't offered by some of the mre educated and schooled elder bees on these subjects.
Well I can't speak for them but when you think about it, it's not because they look down on us, or they are unwilling to assist, they do in many ways. It's more along the lines that the solutions we seek must come from OTC sources, mostly extracting those from OTC chems.
It doesn't help our plight one bit in many cases for someone to chime in with solutions that involve chemicals that are not readily available.
That's the way I see it...
And those are the definitions of workable solutions to me.
Something that helps the masses, not just a select few fortunate enough to have access to premium grade solvents and chems along with pristeen lab working conditions!
That's not meant to offend, that's just the way I see it.
IMHO

[dwarfer]

Really, start another thread if you have it all down.

like Geeze, i find some semi-snide derrogation in your
verbiage, but find it unnecessary to defend prior
assertions to the death, as the target is moving
continuously anyway.

The Dot 3 proposal discussed by Ware and I some months ago
was within the context of turps, oils,  and other substances, as dissolvers of the heavier end PEGS assumed
to be part of the necromancers additive packages.

Many of us are unconstrained by bookish knowledge that if known,
would keep us from trying new things.  Thus, much would be
undiscovered, because certainly much if not most of the
"technology" of this forum arrises from unconstrained "what if"
trials that have yielded good results.


Your disdainful remarks about the MERCK
being available to
us, and therefore constituting an adequate base for us  to
have punctured our own balloons 
before floating them here,
assumes that in fact they are unmodified invariates
of the MERCK information, which, 
in point of my own considered opinion
after considerable investigation, they are not.
(or to be more accurate, those which I was dicking with
were other than those you "fearfully" refer to)

you may (if it is of interest to you)
take a look at the meanderings from early last year
that I posted about the polyampholyte hypothesis,
with refs to other sites. 

in way of approach with new information
which you may in fact have, it would be edifying
for you to note the transit of FormerChemist
thru these hallowed halls about 8 months ago. 
Being more knowledgeable, but not pretentious,
he imparted valuable information that helped many.

i don't visit this area as much as before:
I'm pretty much unable to make any significant
contributions to this technology at this time.

Ahgreich has a good thing going here.

Maybe you have a better thing.

why don't you start a thread?

But knock off the deprecation, as it says more about you
than the people you attack.

on the other hand, do what you want.

[dwarfer]

We apparently were both moved to lovingly response by
SpectralShift's kindest put-downs.

But just to make sure, that IS what my ^^post was directed
to.

hi ware.

==========You know, I always wonder what
makes people do what they do.

Here's spectralshift making a contribution.

Post 478211

(spectralshift: "SWIP should have been more precise in his...", Stimulants)

then??  went straight downhill here: .. Check out his
user profile, look at his downrated posts.

two things:
1.. Congrats to the Hive's discipline system, it's working.
2.  About SS?  He's just Joe's dumb, younger brother..  ":<)
===========

to avoid being off topic, let me add that Ware's comments
about the interlocking nature of the amendments co-operation is on the money,
and that despite SS's comment about ??not changing polarity??
they will change their operation depending on the pH of the
solutions, and if that is the "polarity" to which he refers,
he is just wrong it saying that it does not change.

[spectralshift]

Do you remember 1-2months ago I asked that you slap together a write-up compiling an effective work around for the problems at hand as they deal with OrangeII gaak and other hydrogels/polymers

You can't bee serious ware, that's a straight out lie. Your a cute colourful screen-pet in my computer that fascinates the imaginatory arm of the mind.

I'm a critical straight shooter. It's not my problem you don't accept the truth.

Recommendations I've made are simply these, I chose them to work in with ahgreich's own write-up.

1. To use two Non-polar's.
2. To use alcohol.
3. To wash the non-polars with water.
4. To give time/control heat with some thought.
5. Give thought to supplying the system with water.
6. pre-wash with extraction solvents.

All really basic stuff mate, and very adaptable.


While that looks good on paper, those individual chems were selected to bee married for several reasons.

Where? In your head? They are compressed to form a pill matrix, this isn't anything special.

Ever tried grinding a GOOD set of pills up with a base, and doing a Trtra Trap without the tetra? I guess the stuff that made it through wasn't "married". heh


Your all speaking nonsense, lying, kicking and screaming, because I've shown you up. It didn't have to bee this way, you rude little critters.

You needlessly detered bees from water for a long time didn't you?

Your way was essential wasn't it? Guilty! Here Here!  


You seem to think I'm unerved or unstable in some way old men, but I'm over that.

dwarfer thanks for bringing up my marked down posts, as irrelevant as that is, it shows my honesty and want to give the people the true picture of who I am, and not hide behind other usernames.

[wareami]

In this thread, I'm finding the need to insert some sort of order in trying to protect the integrity of alhgreich's contribution....
Ohhhh Hi Dwarfer!

Spectralshift....please see the new post in the stim forum by The imaginary pet and we'll start disecting an exact procedure that may be of use. If you're UP to the fulfilling the 2 month old request...

[dwarfer]

dwarfer thanks for bringing up my marked down posts, (1)as irrelevant as that is, it (2)shows my honesty and want to give the people the true picture of who I am, and not hide behind other usernames.

Numbers and accents added by me.

(1)Wrong: absolutely provides a matrix within which an accurate projection of your competance, and more importantly your attitude, can be measured.

(2) Incorrect.  Honesty does not derive from another's
"outing" of the information relevent to determining
the nature of your demeanor.

i "fear" i overestimated you: condition rectified..

PS: thanks for the private hate mail.  I'm sure Geeze, Ware, and I will wait with 'bated breath for our ??reputations?? to be overturned by your incisive critiques.
===============

By the way, your choosing to bring totally separate elements into a thread whose focus is the elaboration on
a theme, is not good protocol, in my opinion.

if your methodology deserves a shake, put it up where it can be commented on separately. Unless you are chicken..

regards,
d

PSS: Sory Ware, i just hadda steal your gif..

[spectralshift]

[WmPerry]

My gratitude for method.To all involved. Heres what i did., and the thing worked so pretty:
   Mix dry Gups (48 60's w/trip)1 to 1 with dry Lye. Cover with Acetone.stir well, till soaked through- put inch of tolly on top. Added water, amount maybe half of the toluene, stir, stir stir,  shit turns strange yellowy/orange color (ornge gakk color?)
suck up tol, and dry to beautifull fluffy pseud. best ive ever managed to get
thanks again

[SHORTY]

If i were you i would at least wash those crystals with dh20 and see how much of what you have dissolves.  Im not an expert on the additives like Geez and Ware but i seriously doubt your pseudo is as clean as you may think it is. 

Next time try sodium carbonate instead of lye and you won't get the orange shit.

[suss]

Hello all,

Why do people suggest to boil the dichloromethane out of brake cleaner before using it in the tetra trap, when it has very good solvent properties that may help in the extraction?

Cheers.