I think when coming up with colognes all the ingredients bonds together somehow like they bond to each other instead of smelling just one thing at a time. It’s blended and smells better.
Now with Phero’s the same thing my happen and that is why a mix may work better after sitting for a few days. You smell and receive 2 maybe even 8 phero’s all at once in a mix.
This is no answer and just my 2 cents. I would love to know.
It would be nice to know on a molecular level what happens when others are added if they bond and change the molecules or stay the same and fly off us one pheromone at a time?
It’s really not that hard, even though there may be no straight answer at the moment why not just give it awhile just to “settle” either way? I mean, why not?
Here’s a video about making cologne and how letting it settle is a good thing, yes it’s not regarding pheromones but eh, makes sense for the subject the video is delivering.
I’ve found myself with some time so I will try and explain why things may change if the mones are left to brew. I don’t know if this is correct, but if we asume there is some small chemical reaction that takes place (everything on this planet is made up of chemicals and will react with others things in some way or another) this would make more sense.
OK now for the technical stuff. Lets say mones are complex compounds. A compound is something that is made up of two or more elements. Elements come together to make compounds to be more stable. When they are stable they usually have two or eight electrons in the compounds outer energy circle. If something, another element is introduced to a compound it may have free electrons that want to react with the compound and this is when a chemical reaction will take place and new compounds are formed. This happens so that equilibrium is achieved.
eg, Air + Iron = rust, or more specifically Oxygen + iron = iron oxide… Iron oxide is stable.
To relate this to mones. You could say that one mone (being a chemical) will react with another by taking one or more of its electrons away until things have balanced out. This will leave both the mones different to what they were before they were mixed together. Even if it is a very small difference they will be different on an atomic level. And in fact could resemble something completely different than the original. Of course if everything is stable before they are added together, there will be no exchange of electrons and everything will just mix and stay the same.
That brings up an interesting point… When you spray mones onto your own skin, they will in theory react with your own mones and become something else as well. this is possibly way no one single person can say “use this and it will work great for you…” because you wont know until it mix’s with your own chemistry and becomes whatever it becomes.
This all asumes pheromones are highly /moderatly reactive rather than being stable /Inert. We all understand the concept of a chemical reaction thats not what needs to be explained, the question is how reactive are pheromones in general and between themselfs. Plastic and glass is often used to contain chemicals as they are rather stable /inert substances, why can’t pheromones be?
The pheromones we buy are synthesized and they undergo several chemical reactions, no doubt a complicated process that requires many things such as catalysts and introduction of energy such as heat to cause a reaction. As such, one would assume pheromones are rather stable subtances that require a bit more that just mixing of two chemicals to create something differernt. Although there are certainly substances it will naturally react with simply by mixing them together, most likely the same process that lets out NVO detect the pheromones in the first place. I highly doubt it will be another pheromone /every pheromone that it will react with, lottery tickets probabily have better odds.
Lets assume they did react with each other, this would be the least ideal situation In my honest opinion. Pheromone+Pheromone does not equal ‘super pheromone’, it is very likely it will ruin the substance by turning it into something non-pheromone-like.
What may be more important is pheromones bonding in a non chemically reactive way i.e. like glue.
I think the main importance is that the pheromones are well mixed in the sense that you are getting the correct ammount for each pheromone per spray which essentially requires a good shake. With oil mixes this would require some time to throughly mix into the oil.
edit: Also, if the pheromones reacted with each into something good, i.e. another pheromone, considering the high quantities /concentration androtics deal with it is likely to been easily noticed by androtics as with any of the pheromone producers /researchers.
I agree with what you have said here. But I don’t assume that they are even moderately reactive with one another. That is why I have used oxidation as an example. If you add heat to an oxidation reaction it will happen a lot faster. “Of course if everything is stable before they are added together, there will be no exchange of electrons and everything will just mix and stay the same.”
There is a mone that turns into something else when you wear it… I can’t remember what one it is, I think bnol… turns into none after a while (this is done with the help of bacteria). I’d be willing to bet that it is a simple reaction - just the addition of oxygen to get the none as the end result.
If these are all very stable the above reaction would not take place in the matter of a few hours. If you own a fish tank you will know that there is a cycle called the nitrification cycle. It involves bacteria and is a very slow reaction that is a crucial part of life here on earth. I suspect that when the guys at AD are making the mones there is bacteria involved and then heat to kill them off and then distilling (of sorts), drying out and then remixing to get the pure product. They will be highly unlikely to tell us what or how it’s done for trade secrecy.
And just to correct myself before someone else does. There are 2 or 8 electrons in the outer energy circle of a molecule… not total
Edit: nope, I’m pretty sure its not bnol that turns to none while wearing it. Someone correct me here please…
Androsterone I believe will breakdown to Androstenone. There are some other substances /pheromone related that also covert to androstenone, DHEA is one I believe.
Androstenone and -rone even though I have no chemical background, I can see they are very similar looking at their formulas so the difference is very little, hence why such a conversion is likely to appear.
I doubt androtics use bacteria as a method of manufacturing, that means they have biohazards to worry about and more equipment expense. I’ve also seen some photos of the equipment used to produce pheromones from two other companies and there doesnt appear to be any bio-productions in their kit.
They may source substances from companies that use bacteria and harvest the byproducts but the bacteria would play little role in the actual pheromone. Don’t mistake the fact that bacteria on our body helps towards our pheromones as a necessity for manufacturing pheromones.
I have no experience at all in the manufacturing of mones. But to use bacteria or enzymes to manufacture something is done all the time. And nature has a very effective way of doing it all by its self. It doesn’t mean it’s a bio hazard if done this way. At the point of manufacturing it could be if concentrations are very high.
Your comments about seeing pictures of equipment that other companies use to make mones is most likely the polishing stage of the process. Or even the end user stage like AD is. No one will buy a product that looks like a brewing pile of……. If you have ever made alcohol. It is legal to make it here in New Zealand and I have made plenty of it (I’ve even run my lawn mower on it 98%/Vol :-)). And let me tell you that the “wash” (this is the first stage) that brews out, doesn’t look or smell pretty at all! If you were trying to sell the stuff you wouldn’t show anyone where it originally comes from! And wine?!?! Don’t get me started how disgusting that looks and smells when it’s being made!
On the other hand, show them the lab equipment and the nice shiny beakers and swirly glass tubes, it looks all nice, sterile and expensive. This is where they would be getting the end result while it is beeing polished. And what you have probably seen.
Reason stands, if you want to make mones you will need good quality lab equipment and my bet would be the right bacteria or enzymes to do the dirty work for you, something to feed them and then some way of separating the mones out of the mix once made.
What I’m talking about above is the raw mones that AD gets in a powdered form I believe (there would be no bacteria or what every biological means of making them present at this point – if that’s how they are made). The mixing of them to make all the things that you and I buy is not that complicated at this point… if you know how to do it of course!
I understand what Catlord is saying and I know scientifically he is right - a good shake or two and in a few minutes you should be good enough for our purposes but all the same I always try to wait at least one week and they seem to only get better with age - unless you use them up! I can’t explain it …
Yes, maybe we’ll never know exactly what happens when you leave something like this for a week or more. But at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter how it works… just, if it works, do it
I do not know why it does not seem to work like that for you but I would guess it is because you my friend are probably one of the more socially aware and truly observant males here and probably see more than most of us.
I am sure you pick up the subtle signals better than most of us. Not sure if what I am saying is that you are observant enough to pick up the subtle signals from a mix when the “effects” are lower because the mix has not “perked” long or if it takes us longer to pick up the signals generated by a mix - and we think it is because the mix has gotten better as it has “perked”.
