I’m sure that a more sensitive version wouldn’t help in the slightest.
All that it would do is lower the detection threshold for all of the compounds, pigments included.
More sensitivity may result in the same spectra at lower concentration of pigments but it won’t add new peaks that aren’t showing up on the old version.
that is ONE use case. it works for that during distillation BY ACCIDENT if it is not actually seeing cannabinoids.
given
I’d say it’s NOT about the temperature at which the fluorescence signal is sought…which might have been the difference between it working for distillation & not on the exit port of a recirculating spray wash centrifuge. in my use case, one would expect cannabinoids to plateau as either saturation was reached or all available cannabinoids had been extracted. won’t work if it’s not seeing my target.
hasn’t worked.
above suggests it can’t SEE my target.
not cannabis so not cannabinoids?
or “hemp”
I see the plateau I suggested. except when using cannabis or hemp. then I only see it on the non-cannabinoids “channels”.
Nope, Many substances talked about on this forum fluoresce. 
so that disproves “it doesn’t see THC/CBD” at the claimed concentrations how?!?!
(doesn’t it actually DISPROVE the hypothesis that the signal is from THC or CBD?)
the point is that cannabinoids don’t fluoresce well enough for this to work as claimed for cannnabioids.
if it DID, I would EXPECT to see exactly what you do. which is why I called arometrix up and asked them if they could build a version with a triclamp interface for my fuge like three years ago. they built it. didn’t get me a prototype to test. @Lincoln20XX did. I could never get it to work. in multiple installations. it did NOT agree with HPLC/GC results for when the cannabinoids were ACTUALLY gone. I loaned it to @thesk8nmidget and he had some joy using it for chromatography, except it leaked, and was tracking something other than the target. He bought one. We’ve got it plumbed to a CUP-30. not seeing anything like the expected time course or static traces.
does it work when you heat shit up? dunno. that’s on the list too…
uh huh. is it your THC or something coming along for the ride?
explain the difference in signal in CBD isolate vs CBD distillate?
simple explanation? its a degradation product. not seen in chromatographically prepared samples until they are heated to distillation temps…
I can probably arrange this experiment. CBD isolate vs CBD Distillate. Why not throw in CBDA or CBGA to make sure it’s not a thermal thing.
Nice. If you can repeat the exact experiment above that would be the best demonstration for this thread. Same concentrations if possible.
The thermal degradation is not something normal distillate or cbd needs to worry about in normal lab production settings.
All along the pigment in the distillate and the pigment trapped in the crystal has been the source of the signal.
What exactly is this showing?
A sample is glowing blue and you have a test that says 90%? What’s the point?
[quote=“AlexSiegel, post:193, topic:56964”]
All along the pigment in the distillate and the pigment trapped in the crystal has been the source of the signal.
How is the pigment that you say is the source for the signal still giving blue fluorescent signal with your water clear distillate
[/quote]
The burden of proof is on @arometrix and @spdking to demonstrate that the blue light being generated in the field with the fraction finder is actually coming from cannabinoids.
I see you guys constantly testing impure samples in the field and assuming that any blue light is coming from cannabinoids. You need to expand your knowledge of the literature in the underlying technology (UVa fluorescence spectrophotometery). There’s literally dozens (thousands?) of things that could be fluorescing blue.
One example of blue fluorescing compounds are the plant pigments I’ve discussed in the Pigment Tracker thread. In this case just because a sample appears clear to the eye doesn’t mean it’s free of pigments. That’s the entire point of using a device like the Pigment Tracker.
You should include the paper where that figure is from. It’s earlier in this thread already
Blue light after heating at 230C doesn’t interest me. Read the paper. First sentence talks about “fluorescent derivatives of cannabis”
I added ~10 mg of CBGA to ~15g of isopropyl alcohol, to see if there was a change in signal I added more ~10-20mg I don’t have an analytical balance so I would take the fine details of my experiment with a grain of salt. But you can see a signal and an increase in signal once I added more.
~10mg dab of CBGA on puffco’s medium setting.
This all looks like noise. Can you post some controls?
If the graphs you’re posting represent changes in signal and that’s more sensitive than reading the underlying spectrum, I guess I see how that’s sort of useful. Can you post the visible spectrum being recorded by the fraction finder?
This entire thread looks like noise
