Author Topic: Glycerol-Glycerine as reducing, stabilyzing and capping agent  (Read 1213 times)

Shadsu

  • Guest
I found online that glycerol works as reducing agent also at room temperature , and it's also stabilyzing and capping agent avoiding cluster formation.

Here is the link to this study.
https://file.scirp.org/pdf/ANP_2013052113350692.pdf



The problem is that I have not idea what succeed during elektrolysis, surely it will divide itself in some other chemical products, but I think it will be the same for maltodextrine and other reducing agents.

I think it would be particularly good use glycerol, in reduction method, but I'm not sure what succeed using it for elektrolysis method.
 In any case the maximum ppm tested was 82, but it's possible it works for higher even if they didn't test it.
Colloidal gold will be stable for at least 8 months and using 20% glycerol the particle size will be 8 nm, monodispersed ( I don't know what it means but I red people speak about ).

I' m curious to test it in elektrolysis but I'm afraid that something toxic is produced.
To understand if it works as reducing agent it's enough see if I have a ruby red product, but which other product are inside I don't know it.

Does someone know if it would be a good idea in electrolysis method?
Has someone already experimented with glycerol ( glycerine)?



« Last Edit: March 02, 2019, 06:48:19 AM by Shadsu »

Shadsu

  • Guest
Re: Glycerol-Glycerine as reducing, stabilyzing and capping agent
« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2019, 01:33:26 AM »
I start to look for alternatives for reducing agents because I have not the possibility to heat, mix and electrolyze in the same moment.

The glycerin is one of this alternative because it's possible reduce gold chloride at room temperature.

A benefit would be the particle size...always if who makes it it's not trying to produce very high concentration, with maltodextrine electrolyze method would be 40 ppm, with glycerine could be 82 ppm.
Intuitively a little particle size could be better because with the same quantity of gold you have a much higher superfice which can react in the body.
20 mg gold made by 20 nm could be for example 1.000.000 particles
20 mg gold made by 40 mm could be for example 500.000 particles
20 mg gold made by 8 nm could be for example more than 2.000.000 particles
That means that to have the same effect than 20 mg 20 nm, it's enough less than the half if the particle size is 8 nm.


Offline kephra

  • The older I get, the better I was
  • Administrator
  • Participant
  • *****
  • Posts: 8883
  • Likes: 286
  • Illegitimi Non Carborundum
    • My World As I See It
Re: Glycerol-Glycerine as reducing, stabilyzing and capping agent
« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2019, 02:24:58 AM »
Quote
20 mg gold made by 20 nm could be for example 1.000.000 particles
20 mg gold made by 40 mm could be for example 500.000 particles
20 mg gold made by 8 nm could be for example more than 2.000.000 particles
That means that to have the same effect than 20 mg 20 nm, it's enough less than the half if the particle size is 8 nm
Your math is way off.  Volume is cubic.
Also, research shows nanoparticles become toxic when too small.
There is the unknown and the unknowable.  It's a wise man who knows the difference.

Shadsu

  • Guest
Re: Glycerol-Glycerine as reducing, stabilyzing and capping agent
« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2019, 03:02:42 AM »
I thought the problem of particle size toxicity was relative only to 7 nm nano-rod, and not spherical. In this case then they are 8 nm spherical and they have all the same size.

That a little particle size could be better I don't know really, I try to understand.
My examples were only examples I have not idea how many particles are 20 mg gold if the particle size is 40,20 or 8 nm. I'ntuitively I thought it could be better but it's also possible it's unusefull or worst.