obtained in appreciable quantities by the action of emanation on
compounds of silicon, titanium, zirconium and thorium. In the case of
lead, the amount of carbon dioxide obtained was inappreciable.[126]

    [125] Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY: “Elements and Electrons,” _Journal of the
    Chemical Society_, vol. xcv. (1909), pp. 624 _et seq._

    [126] For a brief account in English of these later experiments see
    _The Chemical News_, vol. c. p. 209 (October 29, 1909).

The Possibility of Making Gold.

§ =101.= It does not seem unlikely that if it is possible to “degrade”
elements, it may be possible to build them up. It has been suggested
that it might be possible to obtain, in this way, gold from silver,
since these two elements occur in the same column in the Periodic Table;
but the suggestion still awaits experimental confirmation. The question
arises, What would be the result if gold could be cheaply produced? That
gold is a metal admirably adapted for many purposes, for which its
scarcity prevents its use, must be admitted. But the financial chaos
which would follow if it were to be cheaply obtained surpasses the
ordinary imagination. It is a theme that ought to appeal to a novelist
of exceptional imaginative power. However, we need not fear these
results, for not only is radium extremely rare, far dearer than gold,
and on account of its instability will never be obtained in large
quantities, but, judging from the above-described experiments, if,
indeed, the radium emanation is the true Philosopher’s Stone, the
quantity of gold that may be hoped for by its aid is extremely small.

The Significance of “Allotropy.”

§ =102.= A very suggestive argument for the transmutation of the metals
was put forward by Professor Henry M. Howe, LL.D., in a paper entitled
“Allotropy or Transmutation?” read before the British Association
(Section B), Sheffield Meeting, 1910. Certain substances are known
which, although differing in their physical properties very markedly,
behave chemically as if they were one and the same element, giving rise
to the same series of compounds. Such substances, of which we may
mention diamond, graphite and charcoal (_e.g._, lampblack)--all of which
are known chemically as “carbon”--or, to take another example, yellow
phosphorus (a yellow, waxy, highly inflammable solid) and red phosphorus
(a difficultly-inflammable, dark red substance, probably possessing a
minutely crystalline structure), are, moreover, convertible one into the
other.[127] It has been customary to refer to such substances as
different forms or allotropic modifications of the same element, and not
to regard them as being different elements. As Professor Howe says, “If
after defining ‘elements’ as substances hitherto indivisible, and
different elements as those which differ in at least some one property,
and after asserting that the elements cannot be transmuted into each
other, we are confronted with the change from diamond into lampblack,
and with the facts, first, that each is clearly indivisible hitherto
and hence an element, and, second, that they differ in every property,
we try to escape in a circle by saying that they are not different
elements because they do change into each other. In short, we limit the
name ‘element’ to indivisible substances which cannot be transmuted into
each other, and we define those which do transmute as _ipso facto_ one
element, and then we say that the elements cannot be transmuted. Is not
this very like saying that, if you call a calf’s tail a leg, then a calf
has five legs? And if it is just to reply that calling a tail a leg does
not make it a leg, is it not equally just to reply that calling two
transmutable elements one element does not make them so?

    [127] Diamond is transformed into graphite when heated by a powerful
    electric current between carbon poles, and both diamond and graphite
    can be indirectly converted into charcoal. The artificial production
    of the diamond, however, is a more difficult process; but the late
    Professor Moissan succeeded in effecting it, so far as very small
    diamonds are concerned, by dissolving charcoal in molten iron or
    silver and allowing it to crystallise from the solution under high
    pressure. Graphite was also obtained. Red phosphorus is produced
    from yellow phosphorus by heating the latter in absence of air. The
    temperature 240-250° C. is the most suitable; at higher temperatures
    the reverse change sets in, red phosphorus being converted into
    yellow phosphorus.

“Is it philosophical to point to the fact that two such transmutable
elements yield but a single line of derivatives as proof that they are
one element? Is not this rather proof of the readiness, indeed
irresistibleness, of their transmutation? Does not this simply mean that
the derivativeless element, whenever it enters into combination,
inevitably transmutes into its mate which has derivatives?”[128]

    [128] Professor HENRY M. HOWE, LL.D.: “Allotropy or Transmutation.”
    (See _The Chemical News_, vol. cii. pp. 153 and 154, September 23,
    1910.)

According to the atomic theory the differences between what are termed
“allotropic modifications” are generally ascribed to differences in the
number and arrangement of the atoms constituting the molecules of such
“modifications,” and not to any differences in the atoms themselves. But
we cannot argue that two such “allotropic modifications” or elements
which are transmutable into one another are one and the same element,
because they possess the same atomic weight, and different elements are
distinguished by different atomic weights; for the reason that, in the
determination of atomic weights, derivatives of such bodies are
employed; hence, the value obtained is the atomic weight of the element
which forms derivatives, from which that of its derivativeless mate may
differ considerably for all we know to the contrary, if we do, indeed,
regard the atomic weights of the elements as having any meaning beyond
expressing the inertia-ratios in which they combine one with another.

If we wish to distinguish between two such “allotropic modifications”
apart from any theoretical views concerning the nature and constitution
of matter, we can say that such “modifications” are different because
equal weights of them contain, or are equivalent to, different
quantities of energy,[129] since the change of one “form” to another
takes place only with the evolution or absorption (as the case may be)
of heat.[130] But, according to modern views regarding the nature of
matter, this is the sole fundamental difference between two different
elements--such are different because equal weights of them contain or
are equivalent to different quantities of energy. The so-called
“allotropic modifications of an element,” therefore, are just as much
different elements as any other different elements, and the change from
one “modification” to another is a true transmutation of the elements;
the only distinction being that what are called “allotropic
modifications of the same element” differ only slightly in respect of
the energy they contain, and hence are comparatively easy to convert one
into the other, whereas different elements (so called) differ very
greatly from one another in this respect, whence it is to be concluded
that the transmutation of one such element into another will only be
attained by the utilisation of energy in a very highly concentrated
form, such as is evolved simultaneously with the spontaneous
decomposition of the radium emanation.

    [129] For a defence of the view that chemical substances may be
    regarded as energy-complexes, and that this view is equally as valid
    as the older notion of a chemical substance as an inertia-complex,
    _i.e._, as something made up entirely of different units or atoms
    each characterised by the possession of a definite and constant
    weight at a fixed point on the earth’s surface, see an article by
    the present writer, entitled “The Claims of Thermochemistry,”
    _Knowledge and Scientific News_, vol. vii. (New Series), pp. 227 _et
    seq._ (July, 1910).

    [130] In some cases the heat change accompanying the transformation
    of an element into an “allotropic modification” can be measured
    directly. More frequently, however, it is calculated as the
    difference between the quantities of heat obtained when the two
    “forms” are converted into one and the same compound.

Conclusion.

§ =103.= We have shown that modern science indicates the essential truth
of alchemistic doctrine, and our task is ended. Writing in 1904, Sir
William Ramsay said: “If these hypotheses [concerning the possibility of
causing the atoms of ordinary elements to absorb energy] are just, then
the transmutations of the elements no longer appears an idle dream. The
philosopher’s stone will have been discovered, and it is not beyond the
bounds of possibility that it may lead to that other goal of the
philosophers of the dark ages--the _elixir vitæ_. For the action of
living cells is also dependent on the nature and direction of the energy
which they contain; and who can say that it will be impossible to
control their action, when the means of imparting and controlling energy
shall have been investigated?”[131] Whatever may be the final verdict
concerning his own experiments, those of Sir Ernest Rutherford, referred
to in the Preface to the present edition, demonstrate the fact of
transmutation; and it is worth noticing how many of the alchemists’
obscure descriptions of their Magistery well apply to that marvellous
something which we call Energy, the true “First Matter” of the Universe.
And of the other problem, the _Elixir Vitæ_, who knows?

    [131] Sir WILLIAM RAMSAY: “Radium and its Products,” _Harper’s
    Magazine_ (December 1904), vol. xlix. (European Edition), p. 57.

THE END.

    _Printed in Great Britain by_

    UNWIN BROTHERS, LIMITED

    WOKING AND LONDON

_Works by H. STANLEY REDGROVE, B.Sc. (Lond.), F.C.S._

    =ON THE CALCULATION OF THERMO-CHEMICAL CONSTANTS.= (Arnold, 1909,
    6s. net.)

    =MATTER, SPIRIT AND THE COSMOS: Some Suggestions towards a better
    Understanding of the Whence and Why of their Existence.= (Rider,
    Popular Edition, 1916, 1s. net.)

    =A MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF SPIRIT.= Being an Attempt to employ
    certain Mathematical Principles in the Elucidation of some
    Metaphysical Problems. (Rider, 1912, 2s. 6d. net.)

    =EXPERIMENTAL MENSURATION.= An Elementary Text-Book of Inductive
    Geometry. (Heinemann, 1912, 2s. 6d. net.)

    =THE MAGIC OF EXPERIENCE.= A Contribution to the Theory of
    Knowledge. With an Introduction by Sir WILLIAM F. BARRETT, F.R.S.
    (Dent, 1916. _Out of print._)

    =BYGONE BELIEFS.= A Series of Excursions in the Byways of Thought.
    (Rider, 1920, 10s. 6d. net.)

    =PURPOSE AND TRANSCENDENTALISM.= An Exposition of Swedenborg’s
    Philosophical Doctrine in Relation to Modern Thought. (Kegan Paul,
    1920, 5s. net.)

    =ROGER BACON, the Father of Experimental Science, and Mediæval
    Occultism.= (Rider, 1920, 1s. 6d. net.)

    =INDUSTRIAL GASES, together with the Liquefaction of Gases.= By
    various authors, including H. S. REDGROVE. (Crosby Lockwood, Second
    Impression, 1918, 9s. net.)

    =THE INDICTMENT OF WAR.= An Anthology. Compiled by H. S. REDGROVE
    and J. H. ROWBOTTOM. (Daniel, 1919, 10s. 6d. net.)

    =JOSEPH GLANVILL, and Psychical Research in the Seventeenth
    Century.= By H. S. REDGROVE and I. M. L. REDGROVE. (Rider, 1921, 2s.
    net.)

=London: WILLIAM RIDER & SON, Ltd., 8 Paternoster Row, E.C. 4=

    Transcriber’s Notes:

    The text of the original work has been retained, including
    inconsistencies in spelling, hyphenation, punctuation, etc., except
    as mentioned below.

    Page 82, footnote [85]: the original work had a letter missing; “or”
    seems to fit best (or van Helmont’s Workes).

    Page 84, Memnonite: possibly error for Mennonite.

    Page 93, fulfull: possibly error for fulfill.

    Changes made to the text:

    Footnotes and illustrations have been moved outside text paragraphs.

    Some minor obvious typographical and punctuation errors have been
    corrected silently.

    Page xvii: 142 changed to 140 (Table of Contents)

    Page 10: quesable changed to questionable

    Page 41: Trismegistus changed to Trismegistos as elsewhere

    Page 66: Gentlemen changed to Gentleman

    Page 120, footnote [104]: Séances l’Académie changed to Séances de
    l’Académie

    Page 140, footnote [130]: modication changed to modification.

End of Project Gutenberg's Alchemy: Ancient and Modern, by H. Stanley Redgrove