Hello Vader I will do my best to debate Chemistry with you. I dont hold many hopes but I will try
Thanks for your comments.
Salts are a subset of chemicals, ionic bonds are a subset of chemical bonds. You imply mutual exclusion when, in fact, ionic bonds in salts are necessarily also chemical bonds in compounds.
They are indeed. Everything you say is correct. Subset being the operative word. The main point was to suggest a salt isnt the most 'stable' formation in the world. In relation to the topic in hand the 'breakability' of the salt would then have an influence on the absorption speed. Different salts different absorptions. My main point is in my opinion alternative salts are a large player in this debate. It is something underlooked. One of the main problems of this is salt detection it rarely happens.
Breaking ionic bonds is as simple as dissolving the sample. Ions dissociate from one another, so an aqueous solution of MDMA HCl (for example) contains free cations of the conjugate acid of MDMA and Cl- anions. GC/MS could certainly be used to identify the counterion to MDMA, but it's not generally what's being looked for.
Your reference to bonding and dissolving is correct. I have very limited experience on GC/MS techniques so I am reliant only on what I read. If I beleive what I read GC/MS lacks the required sensitivity to detect the salts. I have read this specific statement in several journals whilst researching this topic.
I have also noted when referring to the forensic report we have been discussing - the technique they use to trace the salt is not GC/MS yet they are using the GC/MS for MDMA and adulterant detection. I am sure there will be a specific reason for this likely the GC/MS wont detect it. This is a bit speculative but a possibility.
Clearly the GC/MS will detect an isoloated Molecule such as the Acid but I think in the context of the topic this is not relevant. The issue over sniffing out the salt YES or NO is bond related.
I assumed during an MS test the contents is not dissolved. If you were dissolving a pill for example surely the dissolving of the contents may well upset the results? Without knowing the contents you would be guessing when choosing the dissolving solvent. If you are not dissolving how can the GC/MS detect this bond? How is going to break the bond or detect the bond? Surely it will just read it as MDMA not MDMA HCL or equivilaint.
What are these methods? AFAIK you can crash the crystals out of a solvent in which the salt you're forming is insoluble, or recrystallise using hot solvent, and that's about it. MDMA HCl can, IIRC, form a number of hydrates in crystallisation, and hydrated salts will obvious be less potent, but other than that I don't see the crystal structure affecting the high. There will only be one crystal structure in crystals of MDMA HCl that do not contain water molecules, I don't know what it is though, inorganic isn't really my strong point.
I dont entirely agree with what you are saying here. Yes you can crash the crystals from gas or use a hot solvent. But isnt all crystalization either pulling a solid from a liquid or a gas? Doesnt mean there arent alternative methods.
what about the speed at which you cool the solution? What about saturation? What about the solvent choice you use in the solution? What about the time the crystals remain in the solution? What about cooling speeds during the gassing? Do you use a fan do you use ice to cool? What about say tartric acid where by you could theoretically isolate the isomers in some way?
All these things would influence the salt formations and argubly affect the experienced buzz. Couldn't also the crystallisation technique effect the contents of impurity pulled into the final product?
Re the hydrates in order to produce an MDMA hydrate crystal wouldnt you have to produce the crystal first and then recrystalize? I can see this being done say if a dealer were looking to recrystalize with a 'water filler' but I didnt think this could be done using the standard Freebase>Salt processes. Maybe you can introduce the water in the crystal during the Freebase>Salt conversion h2O acetone?
I doubt I am going to win this chemistry debate with you but please let me know your thoughts?
What did you study in organics degree? or do you just like organic chemistry?
Whilst we are on the pills 90s debate. Please can I ask you your opinion on a few things?
(1) Do you think isomer isolation is a practical explaination as to why say a 'defqon' is a 'DANCE' pill and a speaker is a mellow pill? Yet they both contain the same MDMA content no adulterant.
(2) The mint has a clear fast come up speed. Majority report 20 minutes come up. GC/MS tests pure MDMA. Is this a different salt rather than HCL or something else?
(3) Do you think synthetic routes can dictate or influence the perceived high of a pill. Assuming MDMA is the end goal.
(4) Take the popular Reductive Amination of MDP2P using Nitromethane and Foil. Dirty brown molly vs White Clean Molly from the same process do you think MD-P2P or other impurities from this synth can make an effect on the high? What about yellow MDMA powder is this indicative of an alternative synthesis?
(5) Piperonal a popular precursor in 90s. Easy route to MDA. Very much watched now. Is this a good explaination why there were so many MDA, MDEA coctails in the 90s? Is it correct to assume MDA > MDMA is a poor choice for clandestine setup?
(6) Binders, Fillers general pill manufacturing techniques. MDMA chemistry aside does this have any effect on a perceived high?
(7) Do you beleive two different MDMA pills can be different highs? Assuming dose same, Assuming no adulterant - Is MDMA just MDMA and there is no difference?
(8) Does the dose influence the high significantly? Yes you get more fucked. But is the come up faster more intense, is duration shorter is the comedown quicker? Or is everything just proportional to the dose ie bigger up bigger down all timings otherwise the same?
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
