Transmutation: Myth or Reality?

  • Thread starter Thread starter captain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Transmutation
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
6 replies · 3K views
captain
Messages
163
Reaction score
0
what is it exactly? is it some sort of mythological thing because of symbols? or is it just simply changing elements into different ones like gases and liquids?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
all i know about alchemy is from paolo coelho's book, the alchemist. it's supposed to be an ancient art with two main objectives, still not yet accomplished. these are:
1) making the immortality potion
2) turning lead into gold
 
#2 has been accomplished
 
What he said, although it would probably be cheaper to buy gold then use a series of nuclear processes to produce it from lead.
 
Yes, it is definitely MUCH more expensive to synthetically produce gold from lead then extract it from its ores.

Although Kushal accurately cites two of the most important goals of alchemy, you can basically look at alchemy as a precursor to modern chemistry. It also utilized many other sciences. It probably was first practiced in ancient Egypt and slowly spread throughout the Eurasian continent and was still practiced in Europe even in the 1700/1800s.

Many important lab techniques were developed through alchemy such as distillation. The alchemists also synthesized many chemicals that are commonplace today like sulfuric, nitric, and hydrochloric acids, along with ethanol, potash, and saltpeter.

Of course, there was also the mythical and spiritual side of alchemy. Alchemy was kind of like science, religion, and art all melded into one practice.

Some interesting alchemists:
Jabir ibn Hayyan
Hening Brandt
Isaac Newton

-------------------
Backyard Chemistry
 
Last edited:
They used what they had to produce useful compounds, and other not so useful ones.
 
AbedeuS said:
What he said, although it would probably be cheaper to buy gold then use a series of nuclear processes to produce it from lead.

If it wasn't then we would have massive amounts produced and the price of gold would thus be driven down.