Alchemy: Ancient and Modern: Being a Brief Account of the Alchemistic Doctrines, and Their Relations, to Mysticism on the One Hand, and to Recent Discoveries in Physical Science on the Other Hand; Together with Some Particulars Regarding the Lives and Teachings of the Most Noted AlchemistsRedgrove, H. Stanley (Herbert Stanley)
Religion
Alchemy: Ancient and Modern: Being a Brief Account of the Alchemistic Doctrines, and Their Relations, to Mysticism on the One Hand, and to Recent Discoveries in Physical Science on the Other Hand; Together with Some Particulars Regarding the Lives and Teachings of the Most Noted Alchemists
Redgrove, H. Stanley (Herbert Stanley)
Alchemy -- History
§ =96.= It has been pointed out, however, that (in a sense) this change
(viz., of emanation into helium) is not quite what has been meant by the
expression “transmutation of the elements”; for the reason that it is a
_spontaneous_ change; no effort of ours can bring it about or cause it
to cease.[114] But the fact of the change does go to prove that the
chemical elements are not the discrete units of matter that they were
supposed to be. And since it appears that all matter is radioactive,
although (save in these exceptional cases) in a very slight degree,[115]
we here have evidence of a process of evolution at work among the
chemical elements. The chemical elements are not permanent; they are all
undergoing change; and the common elements merely mark those points
where the rate of the evolutionary process is at its slowest. (See also
§§ 78 and 83.) Thus, the essential truth in the old alchemistic doctrine
of the growth of metals is vindicated, for the metals do grow in the
womb of Nature, although the process may be far slower than appears to
have been imagined by certain of the alchemists,[116] and although gold
may not be the end product. As writes Professor Sir W. Tilden: “. . . It
appears that modern ideas as to the genesis of the elements, and hence
of all matter, stand in strong contrast with those which chiefly
prevailed among experimental philosophers from the time of Newton, and
seem to reflect in an altered form the speculative views of the
ancients.” “. . . It seems probable,” he adds, “that the chemical
elements, and hence all material substances of which the earth, the sea,
the air, and the host of heavenly bodies are all composed, resulted from
a change, corresponding to condensation, in something of which we have
no direct and intimate knowledge. Some have imagined this primal essence
of all things to be identical with the ether of space. As yet we know
nothing with certainty, but it is thought that by means of the
spectroscope some stages of the operation may be seen in progress in the
nebulæ and stars. . . .”[117] We have next to consider whether there is
any experimental evidence showing it to be possible (using the
phraseology of the alchemists) for man to assist in Nature’s work.
[114] See Professor H. C. JONES: _The Electrical Nature of Matter
and Radioactivity_ (1906), pp. 125-126.
[115] It has been definitely proved, for example, that the common
element potassium is radioactive, though very feebly so (it emits
β-rays). It is also interesting to note that many common substances
emit corpuscles at high temperatures.
[116] Says Peter Bonus, however, “. . . we know that the generation
of metals occupies thousands of years . . . in Nature’s workshop.
. . .” (see _The New Pearl of Great Price_, Mr. A. E. Waite’s
translation, p. 55), and certain others of the alchemists expressed
a similar view.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account