|
chemical equivalent of the intermediate body is represented by the
arithmetical mean between the equivalents of the other two. Such a
statement well showed the isomerism of elementary substances, and proved
that metals, however dissimilar in outward appearance, were composed of
the same matter differently arranged and proportioned. This theory
successfully demolishes the difficulties in the way of transmutation.
Again, Dr. Prout says that the chemical equivalents of nearly all
elemental substances are the multiples of one among them. Thus, if the
equivalent of hydrogen be taken for the unit, the equivalent of every
other substance will be an exact multiple of it - carbon will be
represented by six, axote by fourteen, oxygen by sixteen, zink by
thirty-two. But, pointed out M. Figuier's friend, if the molecular
masses in compound substances have so simple a connection, does it not
go to prove the all natural bodies are formed of one principle,
differently arranged and condensed to produce all known compounds?
If transmutation is thus theoretically possible, it only remains to
show by practical experiment that it is strictly in accordance with
chemical laws, and by no means inclines to the supernatural. At this
juncture the young alchemist proceeded to liken the action of the
Philosopher`s Stone on metals to that of a ferment on organic matter.
When metals are melted and brought to red heat, a molecular change may
be produced analogous to fermentation. Just as sugar, under the
influence of a ferment, may be changed into lactic acid without altering
its constituents, so metals can alter their character under the
influence of the Philosopher`s Stone. The explanation of the latter
case is no more difficult than that of the former. The ferment does not
take any part in the chemical changes it brings about, and no
satisfactory explanation of its effects can be found either in the laws
of affinity or in the forces of electricity, light, or heat. As with
the ferment, the required quantity of the Philosopher`s Stone is
infinitesimal. Medicine, philosophy, every modern science was at one
time a source of such errors and extravagances as are associated with
medieval alchemy, but they are not therefore neglected and despised.
Wherefore, then, should we be blind tot he scientific nature of
transmutation?
One of the foundations of alchemical theories was that minerals grew
and developed in the earth, like organic things. It was always the aim
of nature to produce gold, the most precious metal, but when
circumstances were not favorable the baser metals resulted. The desire
of the old alchemists was to surprise nature`s secrets, and thus attain
the ability to do in a short period what nature takes years to
accomplish. Nevertheless, the medieval alchemists appreciated the value
of time in their experiments as modern alchemists never do. M.
Figuier`s friend urged him not to condemn these exponents of the
hermetic philosophy for their metaphysical tendencies, for, he said,
there are facts in our sciences that can only be explained in that
light. If, for instance, copper be placed in air or water, there will
be no result, but if a touch of some acid be added, it will oxidize.
The explanation is that "the acid provokes oxidation of the metal
because it has an affinity for the oxide which tends to form." - a
material fact most metaphysical in its production, and only explicable
thereby.
He concluded his argument with an appeal for tolerance towards the
medieval alchemists, whose work is underrated because it is not properly
understood.
LITERATURE:
Atwood, A Suggestive Inquiry into the Hermetic Mastery, 1850
|