View Full Version : Demistifing ion chambers and snake oil
Hi all,
I've read a lot of posts regarding LRL divices like mineoro
and others (dowsing kind) and I'm very sceptic that one of these
devices actually works.
I mean I know a dowser-man (seems like a navaho
shimano or something) hanging around some strange wood pieces that
(he said) he uses to find water and other things (and belive me, he can
-I see him using the dowsing "Wood"- really identifing a water plane
I know that exist and that is still undocumented in our areas) but
can't explain how he phisically do that. Don't know if he can "detect"
other things , like a gold ore.
I read about ionic chambers here and just want to explain what I know
of these devices do demistify some aspects.
There's nothing magic in a ion chamber. It's simply a sensor really close to
a geiger tube but with some differencies.
A tipical geiger tube is made of thin
aluminium with a central electrode (usually tungsten) with some low pressure gas
inside (usually argon but could be some mix of helium-neon-argon plus some
hi-density organic compound like ethanol), then polarized with say 600-800 volts
between outer electrode (tube) and central electrode. Some types have also one or
more "windows" to allow alpha particles (he-nuclei) to enter in the tube: windows
are usually made of thin silicates or plastic material. Normally a geiger tube
detect only gamma-rays (hi freq. em radiations like x-rays) and beta (accelerated
electrons) becouse haven't any window. In simple words it works like this:
when a particle enters the tube it can hit some atom of gas (argon) ---> the hit
produces a ionic pair (the ionized atom + an electron).
The hi voltage field makes the pair elements really accelerated
and a cascade effect (more ions and electrons) is then produced resulting in a current
flowing in the tube caused by the elements of the pair moving to electrodes,
thus recombining and then resaturating the tube with non-ionized gas.
It's a kind of cascade amplifier with a very fast recovery time (so counts can be
accurate also in presence of a huge number of radiations per second) with a
time-unit-counter. It's becouse all radiation units indicates the ammount of
radiations detected in the time unit.
A tipical ion chamber looks like the geiger tube described above BUT:
- usually dry air (normal pressure, 1 ATM) is used
- low voltage is required (usually under 100 volt, in some cases under 10 volts)
- there isn't any window
- the process here hasn't a cascade amplification so the little pair generation
and recombination cause currents that are really small (usually under 10^-12 amperes)
- a hi-impedance , very low bias and leakeage amplifier is needed to detect signals
- modern ion chambers all use chopper amplifiers (to avoid dc drifting/noise)
- EVERY KIND of ionizing RADIATION can produce pairs here
So, every ionizing source (sun light, uv-light, ac fields, natural radiation -rad gas mainly-,
cosmic rays, x-rays, ...but also your digital watch, your mechanical watch with radium activated
night markers, your mobile phone, your mp3 player, you favourite radio station etc. etc. etc. )
can produce pairs in the chamber if the signal is enough, and also a low humididy can perturbate the
pairs migration in huge variations.
Anyway, I repeat, EVERY KIND OF IONIZING RADIATION --> ionic chambers do not detect ions if they
aren't in ionizing radiation behaviour, I mean they must have a hi-speed (like alpha particles) to penetrate the
(thin) walls of the chamber. Actually no alpha particles can be detected with a normal ion chamber,
becouse of the absence of the thin silicate/plastic window : typical small chambers are fully metal
enclosed, and even if ions are highly accelerated they simply can't break the barrier as other things
can (like e.g. hi-energy photons).
So normal ionic chambers DO NOT detect ions from the outside environment but internal ion pairs generated
by some radiation (mostly x-ray, gamma-ray, uv and strong ac/rf signals).
The strange assert that a ionic chamber DETECT ION PAIRS (OR COLLISIONS) FROM THE OUTSIDE WORLD is then
an scientific false, covered with good advertising champains.
The assert that ion chambers CAN DETECT GOLD IONS ONLY is completely false becouse of they works on
electric charges recombination and the electron charge value is the same for every chemical element
(in the real world).
So, if any of these strange things really works for sure it's not by external target IONIC DETECTION.
Best regards,
Max
Chris2
01-28-2007, 03:15 PM
Hi Max,
good post! But I think most of the "Mineoro Fan Comunity" doesn’t understand your comments because they simply are not educated in how electronic and physics works. Ask around and you will see. I'm sure none of them has a university degree in physics or electronic engineering.
Conclusion is they become believers of what they don't understand in the first place.
Chris
Crowbar
01-28-2007, 04:41 PM
Well done, MAX.
Alexismex
01-29-2007, 05:36 AM
so good post Max thanks,
Alexis
okantex
01-29-2007, 06:28 AM
here is a key to puzzle
second product of gold mining companyies is uranium ore.
today's gold is produced by electrolyzes and it is pure because of production process.
what about the gold of old times.are they pure?
or can be uranium inside of it's mixture.
if so,
yes mineoro detects ions but not gold.
uranium generally fonuds with gold and silver ores.
regards
Hi Max,
good post! But I think most of the "Mineoro Fan Comunity" doesn’t understand your comments because they simply are not educated in how electronic and physics works. Ask around and you will see. I'm sure none of them has a university degree in physics or electronic engineering.
Conclusion is they become believers of what they don't understand in the first place.
Chris
Hi Chris,
I've appreciate your post making me focusing on the language I've used. Thanks.
I apologize for the too technically involved post above to anyone that doesn't know much
of physics and electronics - sometimes I write without taking into account that many haven't
the technical education to follow some posts. I'll take into account for future.
I agree that many people like the "Mineoro Fan Comunity" maybe follow the advertize out there
without a deeper understanding of what they actually buy. My post wasn't related only to the
Mineoro's units out there but to all kind of ion chambers claims related to long range ionic
detection.
I'll try to explain my point of view in more simple words for the "man of the street" buyer.
-the "man of the street" buyer guide-
Anyway, it's like when someone with enough money and little understanding of engineering buy an
hidrogen powered car (or a fuel cell one) thinking that it'll be completely safe for the Eart's
environment or that can't produce any little total warming increase. Well, only a tech oriented
mind could think that the fuel used it's not ready available in nature, but needs, to be extracted
from water, a huge ammount of electric energy and to be hi-pressurized (liquid !) other energy...
and so on. So the whole process hasn't , at now, any respect for the nature.
It's inefficient and not completely safe for the end user and the nature.
We produce most of our electric energy using nuclear or gas/oil/carbon burning - dirty tecnhologies.
In future maybe we'll have clean energy and at no costs, and such kind of fuel could became the right
choice,but now ONLY advertising can push ahead this technology.
One difference between remote ionic detection chambers and eco-cars is that the second example
works although it's not efficient and not safe (think about some wrong missile-test of the 60'
- Hidrogen forms explosives mixtures with oxigen and it's extremely dangerous to handle), but the
first doesn't/can't work in any case becouse ionic pairs must be inside the chamber to be revealed!
It's a little drawback !
So remote ionic detection really won't works in these commercial LRL units. This is a fact.
Any college student - with little physics background - can say. Try to ask around, to have some info
from your old science teacher - why not? - sending an email to a doctorate guy. They will answer what
I say: NO REMOTE IONIC DETECTION USING ION CHAMBERS.
I also was wondered that some LRL sell around - so I've discussed the topic with many friends with
physics and eng degree and no one say "maybe" this or "maybe" that --> all answer "impossible",
"doesn't make sense", "no way"...
I'm not saying that Mineoro units don't work (I never tested one) but JUST that the principle of
operation they say (remote ionic detection) is fake stuff and, last, only an adversiting strategy.
Some dubts make our life safer than "no dubts at all".
What I want to tell is DON'T belive in advertising. Just a bit of common sense can avoid an unuseful
thousand dollars expense - do you think that if someone have realized such kind of detector he/she
wan't to put them on the market ? and without a patent ? do you think that if the principle of
operation declared is fake (fact) these units work anyway (maybe using some mystical-new-age
detection process) ? if so, buy it ! No one can help you anymore.
Do you think that, if this technology works, any big manifacturer don't want to enter the business too ?
White's, Garrett, Minelab, Fisher etc etc don't want to produce that stuff becouse they are real big
industries with a "name" to defend : no big company want to make a wallmart-like detector of treasures.
They aren't worried of patents of others here (there are no patents at all!) but of the consequences of such a
production: they already sell huge numbers of standard metal detectors in the world and don't want to
lose their fame of good manifactures - in any case any m.d. produced really works and results are proved.
No big companies, yeah, but small ones, maybe in some exotic place, would make it for you!
Just common sense rules. Yeah. But would you like to buy a car that the manifacture claims "can fly",
for only $1000000 cash without a little test drive or warranty?
It's up to you.
-end of the "man of the street" buyer guide-
Best regards,
Max
here is a key to puzzle
second product of gold mining companyies is uranium ore.
today's gold is produced by electrolyzes and it is pure because of production process.
what about the gold of old times.are they pure?
or can be uranium inside of it's mixture.
if so,
yes mineoro detects ions but not gold.
uranium generally fonuds with gold and silver ores.
regards
Hi Okantex,
"what about the gold of old times.are they pure?
or can be uranium inside of it's mixture."
I'm not a geo-degree but try to answer with what I know.
BTW This post must be technical oriented. (no simple words to talk about complex things! I'll try to make
it easier as I can)
I have realized that Mineoro claims its units "can find gold", not "gold of old times" but anyway let's
talk about old-gold.
Well, I know that old time gold has, generally speaking, a lot of impurities inside the matrix. Yes, it's
true. That's becouse of the old extraction methods and artifacts manifacturing in the past. Gold is a perfect
recyclable element (like aluminium) and may be re-fused indefinitely. So contamination could appear also
outside the "mine/ore" way - just by fusion, tools and manifacturing e.g. , for coins, the coiniage process.
But talk about uranium or other radioactive materials (mainly radium, thorium) : yes they can be present in
the ore/mine. It happens sometimes like in some Syberian mines or in the US also where gold and radioactive
materials are often in the same ore (some old Colorado mines are examples). It's rare instead in Egiptian
ancient gold (as I know) becouse of the native nature of the gold ore inclused in quartz crystals.
Also it's not so frequent in south-africa and australian gold mines. Don't know in South and Central America.
Anyway, it's possible that gold ore can be contamained by radioactive elements. So ancient gold could be for
sure.
All depend on how much is contamination in the mass unit and what type of elements and intensity of ionizing
radiations are developed. There are a number of variables involved like the percentage of elements, isothopes,
decading factors etc so a unique model of radiating behaviour is impossible to make before excavation and
analisis.
Another issue is that Mineoro can't detect airborn ions (or any other ion outside the so called "ion chamber").
Then why trying to find gold using radiations ?
The total ammount of radiation in an ancient gold artifact or bar could be thousand times lower than radon gas
trapped in the ground around the object or than the minerals that are in the ground matrix
- making impossible to reveal the target emission from the background radiations emission.
Another issue, is "why use a ion chamber instead of a normal geiger counter" ? I mean...if one would find some
radiations out there the geiger tube will overcome any ion chamber in such a task. Modern geiger counter units
are cheapy (say 200$) an hi-reliable e.g. 100 or more times respect to any small ion chamber, and they identify
ONLY wanted radiations (beta, gamma, alpha) - no radio stations etc.
Anyway, no gamma-rays, no alpha particles, no beta-rays can be related to a specific kind of primary element
(contamained gold or other metal) , just becouse they are always the same for every source of them.
Decading elements (like cesium isothopes) can be identified only using a mass-spectrometer in a vacuum environment
or other kinds of heavy and non-portable technologies. So any radioactive-to-gold interaction is simply undetectable
in a search field environment.
So it's impossible, this way, to make any specific element (gold) detection or discrimination.
Best regards,
Max
Hi all,
about metals and metallurgy in the ancient world I remember I have some
spare references to signal here.
Maybe someone find these useful.
(from my library volume 2 of "A History of Technology",
Clarendon Press, Oxford 1956):
about mining in the ancient world:
Agricola Georgius, "De re metallica libri XII", Froben , Basilea, 1556
English Translation by H.C. Hoover and Lou H.Hoover, Mining Magazine , London, 1912
Bailey, K.C. , "The Elder Pliny's Chapters on Chemical Subjectss" , Arnold, London, 1929
and the good
Gowland, W. "The metals in the Antiquity", Brill, Leida, 1950
about gold and precious metals artworking in the ancient world:
Casson S. ,"The Technique of Greek Coin Dies", International Numismatic Congress, London 1936
Hili, G.F., "Ancient Methods of Coining", Numism, Chron V series
Biringuccio, Vanoccio, "De la Pirotechnia voll. VIII", Venetia 1540.
English translation by C.S. Smith and Martha T Gnudi - American Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, New York, 1943
Also I know that British Museum has a lot of pubblications out there on this
topic related to items contamination by impurities.
----
Best regards,
Max
Hi Max,
Liked your last post...all the classics... and I thougt I'm the only one here reading 450 years old books.
Below mercury being extracted from cinnabar ore in my town 500 years ago.
Hi Max,
Liked your last post...all the classics... and I thougt I'm the only one here reading 450 years old books.
Below mercury being extracted from cinnabar ore in my town 500 years ago.
Hi Leto,
you are not the only I think :D . I know that many THs (the full-time ones) read actually from the Archive of the Indies of Sevilla...I mean the ones that try to find ships and related in the Florida-Bahamas areas and Carribeans in general.
My father has a lot of historical books and I read some parts from time to time. I have a number too. It's interesting how a lot of common life objects that we use everyday have ancestors in the ancient world. It's amazing to read how these ancient populations found solutions for the real life we still use -just industrial revolution makes them mass-products.
BTW nice to hear from you that someone still appreciate this kind of readings.
Best regards,
Max
Hi Max,
I too have posted articles on the so called ionic and electrostatic field detection principles supposedly used on LRLs. They are here somewhere.:)
Dell Winders
01-30-2007, 05:55 AM
So any radioactive-to-gold interaction is simply undetectable
in a search field environment.
]
During my many years of field experience searching for Gold, I don't find this to be true. Perhaps text book logic needs to be revised.
In conducting aerial surveys for gold deposits before GPS was available, the instrumentation we used would detect and record Gold deposits but this would only bring us in the proximity of the Gold for a ground search.
To locate the Gold deposit(s) we would bury 25 pounds of low grade Uranium ore in 2-3 locations within the general proximity of the aerial location, then wait 3-4 weeks. The Uranium ore appeared to take on the characteristics of the Gold, and metered the same as Gold with our instruments.
When we returned to the aera after an alloted time, we would detect the known locations of the Uranium ore, as well as the unknown location of the Gold deposit, and by calculating the distances between the known targets, and the unknown target we could isolate and pinpoint the location of the Gold deposit.
"What has been done, can be done" Dell
"What has been done, can be done" Dell
Hi Dell,
I know that some trace-elements are used to mark water flows underground or to detect the
speed e.g. of the oil flow in a pipe and mining prospects also : yes is true.
I mean...one can use also other stuff like geo-seismic waves to find a gas/oil reservoir
or an ore gold deposit underground using different propagation times or many other
technologies to do the same thing.
Anyway, using radioactive tracing it's not a simple thing to do and (in any case) :
requires methodic sampling and nuclear lab analysis to determine if any gold-isothope
was generated by radiations interaction in field.
The method you explained seems good in the non-GPS era to mark inland positions to be
detected using geiger counters mounted e.g. on a plane flying at low altitude or
hand-held also expecially for gamma-ray marking...used to mark spots and then making
some triangle or other pattern to identify a specific position inside the field
(like the one that mobile phone cells calculate to localize the transmitter on the base of
the strenght of the signal received).
Well, the problem is :
"The Uranium ore appeared to take on the characteristics of the Gold,
and metered the same as Gold with our instruments."
Uhm
Sometimes, big mining companies use these technologies but often in outsourcing , so
they pay a specialized lab for this kind of analysis on samples.
Limiting to observe secondary radiations, assuming one can shut down correctly the primary
source (in this case the uranium ore), can't say if it's a gold deposit out there or
another different one before excavation, sampling, analysis- radiations are always the same
(alpha beta, gamma), only intensity and types detected could vary, but in a non predictable way.
No airborn isothope could be detected here becouse they are trapped in the ground matrix.
It's not like a nuclear explosion where stuff fly around and then a plane or other vehicle (e.g.
an equipped tank) can detect airborn particles.
So-called well-analysis must then take place, producing sampling of the suspect ore.
Another issue here is that geologycal hypothesis play a major role - you put your uranium
ore around a "promising" place, but what about distances ? accurancy require small distancies
in positioning your sources (uranium ore).
If this is the case you are right.
Then let's make some questions.
Obviusly, if one start to dig holes, put uranium-ore inside, then use complex radiation
marking techniques by planes , take samples and elaborate the results ...
well, he/she's not an hobbist or not ?
If we are talking about remote sensing using hand-held detectors, the scenario is
quite different. Or not ?
I can't see any information about digging holes around and putting some pounds of uranium (hey!)
and then doing wells and sampling using a rotative machinery , to send to a nuclear lab...etc
in the Mineoro website or in other LRL user manual that I see untill now.
Do you know any user manual that talks about this activities ? If, so please let me know.
So, to be clear, when I say "any radioactive-to-gold interaction is simply undetectable
in a search field environment" I refer to our world (the hobbists/THs world) with hand-held unit,
I mean using such a detector (so called ion chambered ones or whatever LRL) and simply walking
with the detector in your hand -just following the beep-beep.
Maybe, if lucky, one can find a road-runner this way.
Best regards,
Max
Hi all,
I'm posting some data about gold chemistry to have just other confirms that
gold doesn't radiate anything (in normal conditions):
natural gold is all
Isotope Atomic mass (ma/u) Natural abundance (atom %)
197Au 196.966543 (4) 100
other (transition) isotopes are:
Isotope Mass Half-life Mode of decay
194Au 193.96534 1.64d EC to 194Pt
195Au 194.965017 186.12d EC to 195Pt
196Au 196.966551 6.18 d EC to 196Pt; β- to 196Hg
198Au 197.968225 2.694d β- to 198Hg
199Au 198.968748 3.14d β- to 199Hg
but these (transition) are originating from strong nuclear interactions (e.g. nuclei bombing in a reactor or in a particle accelerator).
For non-educated ones, these isotopes above e.g. 199Au tend to transform in other (finally stable) elements (transition) with radiation emissions (in this case an atom of 199Au become an atom of 199Hg -mercury- with a single beta-emission -an accelerated electron-).
Half-time is the time needed for a half mass to transform (e.g. Au199 half-life is 3.14 d --> in 3.14days half of it become mercury).
Now, in a free radiation environent (e.g. normal search field) an ancient gold artifact or bar must be 100% isotope Au197 - stable and not radiating anything.
Best regards,
Max
In conducting aerial surveys for gold deposits before GPS was available, the instrumentation we used would detect and record Gold deposits but this would only bring us in the proximity of the Gold for a ground search.
I suppose since you have a vested interest in making and selling these gizmo's...you can make this C.R.A.P up :rolleyes:
During my many years of field experience searching for Gold, I don't find this to be true. Perhaps text book logic needs to be revised.
Revisions would be forthcoming if the evidence to the contrary was fully documented and the experiment could be repeated by others under controlled conditions and produced the same results.
In conducting aerial surveys for gold deposits before GPS was available, the instrumentation we used would detect and record Gold deposits but this would only bring us in the proximity of the Gold for a ground search.
What specifically was the instrumentation used?
To locate the Gold deposit(s) we would bury 25 pounds of low grade Uranium ore in 2-3 locations within the general proximity of the aerial location, then wait 3-4 weeks. The Uranium ore appeared to take on the characteristics of the Gold, and metered the same as Gold with our instruments.
Which are the (presumably measurable) "characteristics" being referred to?
When we returned to the aera after an alloted time, we would detect the known locations of the Uranium ore, as well as the unknown location of the Gold deposit, and by calculating the distances between the known targets, and the unknown target we could isolate and pinpoint the location of the Gold deposit.
What kind of detecting apparatus was being used?
Since the gold deposit locations where unknown, how did you figure you had actually detected them?
If the unknown target locations are by definition -unknown- how do you calculate a distance from the known location to the unknown location?
here is a key to puzzle
second product of gold mining companyies is uranium ore.
today's gold is produced by electrolyzes and it is pure because of production process.
what about the gold of old times.are they pure?
or can be uranium inside of it's mixture.
if so,
yes mineoro detects ions but not gold.
uranium generally fonuds with gold and silver ores.
regards
Okantex, your suggestion appears plausible, but it does not explain the claim that one can bury "new" jewelry grade gold and after a few weeks of being underground it can be detected. Clearly gold is not a Uranium magnet, so the buried jewelry is not going to be detectable by this method.
Okantex, your suggestion appears plausible, but it does not explain the claim that one can bury "new" jewelry grade gold and after a few weeks of being underground it can be detected. Clearly gold is not a Uranium magnet, so the buried jewelry is not going to be detectable by this method.
Hi Rudy,
I agree with yuor posts. I think that these methods (buring uranium or other stuff there) for the purpose of finding gold are simple science-fiction.
I have no dubt these kind of stuff has nothing to do with TH but simply with
mining and other geologycal surveys.
Best regards,
Max
"What kind of detecting apparatus was being used?
Since the gold deposit locations where unknown, how did you figure you had actually detected them?
If the unknown target locations are by definition -unknown- how do you calculate a distance from the known location to the unknown location?
"
yes, right !
Hypothesis:
I think he was talking about some plane-equipped with e.g. a sensible geiger counter and a
gamma-ray sensor...like the ones used in colorado in the 50's to find radioactive ores.
The kind of stuff used in geo surveys to find radioactive ore deposits,
but in this case the implicit reference was to a secondary radiation spot ( I think ).
If the above secondary radiation was revealed then a kind of "pinpointing" was possible
because fixed primary sources positions were known.
Unfortunately, this method don't work with gold items because :
- the propagation path (of radiations) between sources and target is not so sure to happen
- also if propagation of radiations occours no secondary radiation could be revealed in this case
(not from a plane or an hand-held instrument)
- also if propagation of trace elements occours and then revealed there is no way to detect gold
because this only evidence that there is a path (e.g. a water flow underground) but not that there
is anything else --> this is used to mark e.g. oil flows in gas/oil surveys.
One has to dig...so this is not remote sensing, detecting or discriminating but simply
a sampling for ores...wow ! Never see one sampling for treasures with a well-borer?
(I see one on TV - in Oak Island - Canada - but they know that there is a treasure below their
feet! and it works ! they find small pieces of gold in the bore rod ! )
So the conclusion is: can't use radioactivity to find gold items.
If Mineoro's or other LRL units work then is not by radioactivity (and not by ions - so whatever now?).
Best regards,
Max
okantex
01-31-2007, 01:23 PM
max
what do you think about this page.
http://personal.picusnet.com/one/polaroid.htm
what caused that light in picture.
Carl-NC
01-31-2007, 02:18 PM
The streaks are caused by old film and/or uneven roller pressure in the camera. This is not uncommon with Polaroids, but when it happens to a treasure hunter, they seem to believe it's caused by hidden treasure. Everyone else says, "Damn camera!"
- Carl
Dell Winders
01-31-2007, 05:37 PM
The streaks are caused by old film and/or uneven roller pressure in the camera. This is not uncommon with Polaroids, but when it happens to a treasure hunter, they seem to believe it's caused by hidden treasure. Everyone else says, "Damn camera!"
- CarlToday 08:23 AM
You try to give the illusion all Treasure hunters think alike. Sorry Carl, one size does not fit all.
Are you jealous, prejudice, or just your egotistical superiority complex shining through? Dell
The streaks are caused by old film and/or uneven roller pressure in the camera. This is not uncommon with Polaroids, but when it happens to a treasure hunter, they seem to believe it's caused by hidden treasure. Everyone else says, "Damn camera!"
- Carl
Hi Carl,
I found this site very interesting. Thanks a lot.
Best regards,
Max
max
what do you think about this page.
http://personal.picusnet.com/one/polaroid.htm
what caused that light in picture.
Hi Okantex,
I can't say what caused the light in the pictures -well, not watching them on a pc monitor-
but can agree with Carl on the hypothesis that
"old film and/or uneven roller pressure in the camera" can cause such a behaviour.
Obviosly, if the photo was not altered/manipulated intentionally. It's so simple that any
teenager can do photoretouch on the fly using say adobe photoshop.
Anyway, I'll assume here the photo is authentic and not manipulated.
As you already may know Polaroid camera film is a "kind of magic", I mean, there is a lot
of stuff on that paper because it have to react not only to light when one shoot the button
but also to a number of chemical reactions that just in few seconds develop the photo on
the same substrate. Here anything strange could happen.
From the website you posted I recall the last part of the "article" :
"Another treasure illusion is tiny yellow spots on the picture.
The engineers at Polaroid told me that this is caused by small particles of dust
or dirt on the rollers that squeeze the film, as it comes out of the camera.
So if you clean the rollers well, than this affect disappears from the photos."
So it seems to be related to the mechanical and chemical aspects of the device and the paper
(in this case was SX 70).
I experienced many of this strange optical effects with my old 35mm reflex camera also.
One time I've used a B/w russian made film (I'll never use again), my brother buy for cheap,
and obtained so strange white spots that I can't belive at first - but some days after I
discovered that the film was expired 7 years before use!
I'm skeptic on that topic.
It'll be fashinating if a kind of energy will radiate from gold or treasures...wow
its aura (kirlian stuff) or its "energy" ! If one loves new-age stuff ...just don't put
your head under aluminium foil to prevent aliens remote sensing, that's what I say.
People become aggressive and call police if one walk on the street with such a cover.
Returning serious: gold doesn't radiate anything in normal state energy.
No gamma-rays, no x-rays, no rf just...nothing.
Another issue is then the one related to IR detection. I've read a lot of posts regarding
IR detection using "leningrad 7" or something. Using an IR detector to find gold ???
From when gold radiate IR ??? ::confused::
I know that the gold spectrum contains lines that correspond to specific frequencies but
this gold must be energized to "jump" in a hi-energy state, then radiate photons in the
decay phase(s). This is explained by the Shroedinger (write it right?) equation.
We here are not talking about demining a minefield where "recent" mines lyes few inches underground,
and are visible by a "cold-camera" but of gold items buried at least some feets underground where
ground thermic level sorrounds everything inside and "cold-camera" S/N ratio degrade is absolute.
So what about these detectors ??? have they a transmitter stage to excite gold atoms ???
If so at what frequency it works ??? With how much power ??? What's normal attenuation in
the ground ??? can a suitable S/N ratio be developed in the receiver ??? etc etc etc
but also
why use a "leningrad 7" if one can use an IR camera instead or a photomultiplier tube ???
Leningrad 7, zinc sulphide, IR leds...what's that stuff for???
Wanna see the gamma-rays: let's buy some serious stuff e.g. military surplus tubes - don't
mess with poor-man and kitchen electronics - this is my point of view.
The problem is...exciting a gold mass buried say 10 or 100 feet in the ground is not so easy task
and requires a lot of power - the kind of power one can't put in an hand-held star-trek-like pistol.
Attenuation is too high at those frequencies and one must send Megawatt bursts (hey!) to penetrate
in depth. Maybe NASA has one of this cannons - do you remember the StarWars project? - but I dubt
any THs can make one in his home garage.
So i think that, with actual THs technology available, also IR detection fails to detect buried gold or anything else underground.
So if Mineoro's or other LRL unit work it's not by InfraRed (and not by radioactivity and not by ions).
Best regards (and sorry for the very long post),
Max
michael
01-31-2007, 06:56 PM
Hi all, Thank you for your good points, especially Max, you're right about ion chambers.
like what happens in Atomic Absorption Detection for determining the elements in different materials. and it's obvious what is going in the claimed "ion chamber" in mineoro devices is not comparable to these technologies and.....
but one thing is brought up here: I want to ask from knowledgeable men about electronic ; Max, Rudy,....
Do you believe that old buried gold objects( not only gold, any kind of metal)
behave completely different than fresh ones? do you believe a few (e.g. 12) medium size gold coins be detectable at 3.5 meters by one device? Do you know this kind of detector or have you heard about?
have you ever had such experiences? what I believe and before this have told; physic science or physic logics has it's own esteem, but experiences if not be standout, are not less important.
It's remarkable that I'm not going to advocate for any special producer or device, as I'm really one independent user.
but just decide at least take the discussion to a positive point to get a result or propound a subject to be observed much more.
Qiaozhi
01-31-2007, 09:42 PM
You try to give the illusion all Treasure hunters think alike. Sorry Carl, one size does not fit all.
Are you jealous, prejudice, or just your egotistical superiority complex shining through? Dell
Rant over?? Feeling better now??
Poor demented soul. :rolleyes: Perhaps a bit of egotistical map dowsing will calm the troubled mind. :razz:
Nothing extraordinary in the pictures.
It only shows that long time buried gold produce a strong air ionization which according to the right conditions are visible. The polaroid pictures shows that.
What about it? Mineoro claims this for eons. I know it's true. The pictures also..
Unfortunately the researcher in that site failed to conclude that it only happens to long time buried gold.
I always researched sites which people claimed to spot a fire ball on certain summer nights. The last one was in last july. The beeped and a gold vein was found.
Dell Winders
01-31-2007, 11:12 PM
Max, I am in awe of your scientific knowledge, and appreciative of your willingness, and kind consideration of sharing, rather than dictating and showing disdain to those of us without formal education. Thank You, for that courtesy.
I'm not disagreeing with anything you say, but as you well know true Science is an open door of new discoveries, and revised theories. It often takes years, and sometimes lifetimes for new concepts and even small details to be proven, published, peer reviewed, and generally accepted.
Every thing you have said is within the rigid constraints and procedural limitations of Academia. You are safe among your peers for not thinking beyond the Academic box of past truths.
I have the impression you are more open minded to possibilities outside the realm of your formal education, so I will accept the risk of being mocked and ridculed and offer my own perspective to your present viewpoint;The problem is...exciting a gold mass buried say 10 or 100 feet in the ground is not so easy task
and requires a lot of power -
That's true, but perhaps the power you suggest is not necessary.
I would suggest that we are metering an emenating "field" rising from a target element to the surface of land, or water, and measurable above the earth in mass to at least 3,000 feet above the surface of the earth.
"What has been done, can be done" Dell
"What kind of detecting apparatus was being used?
Since the gold deposit locations where unknown, how did you figure you had actually detected them?
If the unknown target locations are by definition -unknown- how do you calculate a distance from the known location to the unknown location?
"
yes, right !
Hypothesis:
I think he was talking about some plane-equipped with e.g. a sensible geiger counter and a
gamma-ray sensor...like the ones used in colorado in the 50's to find radioactive ores.
The kind of stuff used in geo surveys to find radioactive ore deposits,
but in this case the implicit reference was to a secondary radiation spot ( I think ).
If the above secondary radiation was revealed then a kind of "pinpointing" was possible
because fixed primary sources positions were known.
Unfortunately, this method don't work with gold items because :
- the propagation path (of radiations) between sources and target is not so sure to happen
- also if propagation of radiations occours no secondary radiation could be revealed in this case
(not from a plane or an hand-held instrument)
- also if propagation of trace elements occours and then revealed there is no way to detect gold
because this only evidence that there is a path (e.g. a water flow underground) but not that there
is anything else --> this is used to mark e.g. oil flows in gas/oil surveys.
One has to dig...so this is not remote sensing, detecting or discriminating but simply
a sampling for ores...wow ! Never see one sampling for treasures with a well-borer?
(I see one on TV - in Oak Island - Canada - but they know that there is a treasure below their
feet! and it works ! they find small pieces of gold in the bore rod ! )
So the conclusion is: can't use radioactivity to find gold items.
If Mineoro's or other LRL units work then is not by radioactivity (and not by ions - so whatever now?).
Best regards,
Max
Don't think so Max. Re-read Dell's post again.
"In conducting aerial surveys for gold deposits ..."
Why would he or anyone use a Geiger counter to look for Gold Deposits (unless per chance they are looking for Gold deposits heavily laced with radioactive material)?
It was only after the Gold deposit was roughly located (with undescribed instrumentation) that they would pollute the area with
low grade radioactive material. If he had been using a Geiger counter as you thought he was doing, then why bury low grade radioactive material at all? If the Geiger counter worked from the airplane, it would certainly work even better on the ground.
So no, it doesn't wash.
It would be a lot simpler, more benign to the environment and more energy efficient, if Dell would just use a lapis philosophorum to get his gold.
<SNIP>
That's true, but perhaps the power you suggest is not necessary.
I would suggest that we are metering an emenating "field" rising from a target element to the surface of land, or water, and measurable above the earth in mass to at least 3,000 feet above the surface of the earth.
"What has been done, can be done" Dell
Dell, in nature there is no such thing as a "free lunch".
Where does the energy to support this field come from? If it is Telluric in nature, then how is it that the presumed "field" produced by the Gold or other precious metal, is different from the "fields" that would also be given off by other non-precious matter in the neighborhood?
Nothing extraordinary in the pictures.
It only shows that long time buried gold produce a strong air ionization which according to the right conditions are visible. The polaroid pictures shows that.
What about it? Mineoro claims this for eons. I know it's true. The pictures also..
Unfortunately the researcher in that site failed to conclude that it only happens to long time buried gold.
I always researched sites which people claimed to spot a fire ball on certain summer nights. The last one was in last july. The beeped and a gold vein was found.
Ohh, so you are now saying that it is the air itself that is the source of ions rather than the ions being gold.
You should read up on the latest research on the source of ball lighting.
Dell Winders
02-01-2007, 05:07 AM
Where does the energy to support this field come from? If it is Telluric in nature, then how is it that the presumed "field" produced by the Gold or other precious metal, is different from the "fields" that would also be given off by other non-precious matter in the neighborhood?
Sorry Rude-y, there can be no discussion with you. I don't see the respect, or the aptitude for you to think outside the academic box you have securely shackled yourself within.
I never said Gold, or any chemical element produced a "Field". I don't know if it does, or not. Nor, did I say the composition of the target "field" was any different from that of other Chemical elements. Dell
Dell Winders
02-01-2007, 05:34 AM
"What kind of detecting apparatus was being used?
Since the gold deposit locations where unknown, how did you figure you had actually detected them?
If the unknown target locations are by definition -unknown- how do you calculate a distance from the known location to the unknown location?
"
yes, right !
Hypothesis:
Max, I'm sorry! I was wrong about you being able to think beyond the box. Your questions and hypothesis shows me you can't.
I do appreciate the information you generously shared. Dell
michael
02-01-2007, 08:15 AM
Rudy and Max, I again thank for your info and too repeat my question, why don't you desire to answer me?
I repeat it as perhaps was ignored(# 25):
"one thing is brought up here: I want to ask from knowledgeable men about electronic ; Max, Rudy,.... Do you believe that old buried gold objects( not only gold, any kind of metal)
behave completely different than fresh ones? do you believe a few (e.g. 12) medium size gold coins be detectable at 3.5 meters by one device? Do you know this kind of detector or have you heard about?
have you ever had such experiences? what I believe and before this have told; physic science or physic logics has it's own esteem, but experiences if not be standout, are not less important.
It's remarkable that I'm not going to advocate for any special producer or device, as I'm really one independent user."
Max, Rudy and other skeptics here! with courtesy, What have been your field experiences about what I pointed above?
Do you really want to get a useful conclusion or not just to show your college info and cast those in our teeth? of course all of the forum members want to learn more, no doubt, and I'm always a learner without any arrogation, but you as physic analyzers please benefit us at least me from your field experiences.
before this thread I tried to get a conclusion, but one radical and crabby skeptic who disliked to get result, shifted from answers, bustled and took discussion to dispute, to nowhere.
Hi all, Thank you for your good points, especially Max, you're right about ion chambers.
like what happens in Atomic Absorption Detection for determining the elements in different materials. and it's obvious what is going in the claimed "ion chamber" in mineoro devices is not comparable to these technologies and.....
but one thing is brought up here: I want to ask from knowledgeable men about electronic ; Max, Rudy,....
Do you believe that old buried gold objects( not only gold, any kind of metal)
behave completely different than fresh ones? do you believe a few (e.g. 12) medium size gold coins be detectable at 3.5 meters by one device? Do you know this kind of detector or have you heard about?
have you ever had such experiences? what I believe and before this have told; physic science or physic logics has it's own esteem, but experiences if not be standout, are not less important.
It's remarkable that I'm not going to advocate for any special producer or device, as I'm really one independent user.
but just decide at least take the discussion to a positive point to get a result or propound a subject to be observed much more.
Hi Michael,
I'll try to answer on the base of my experience in metal detecting. I have a little
knowledge of md compared to others in this forum but know that, sometimes, happen that
a target metal object buried in the ground for many years responds with an increased
signal than one can expect from a target of same composition, size, shape and depth.
This so called "halo" effect appears to be real and common to experience expecially
using vlf/ib machines (so CW -continuos wave detectors).
I don't know if it happens with gold - never experienced a halo effect with gold or
aluminium, but for sure can be present with brass(alloy), copper, silver and bronze(alloy).
Also iron seems to be a good candidate.
I'm sure that there are chemical interactions between the ground matrix and the metal
object if it's reactive interaction- so salts and other compounds can be produced in years all
around the target. I suppose also that the reactions can sometimes be partially reversed
having small granes of metal distribute in the surrounding matrix. This is a kind of
"migration" in the matrix.
The phenomenon is related to the ground composition and the kind of metal in the target -
so it's not a postulate that a metal, say bronze alloy, in any case, develop compounds
that migrate in the sorrounding matrix - it could simply oxidate in surface and not exibit
any halo effect.
Based on the composition one matrix can be "inhert" or "reactive" for a particular kind of
target. This inhertia is effectively frequent with gold - a very low reactivity metal that
only in particular conditions creates compounds (e.g. with HCN and CN groups or with mercury).
Anyway, this is elementar chemistry.
"do you believe a few (e.g. 12) medium size gold coins be detectable at 3.5 meters by one device?"
uhm seems impossible --> don't know how
"Do you know this kind of detector or have you heard about?
have you ever had such experiences?"
Never. The deepest kind of machine out there is magnetometer but won't works with gold.
Maybe a good PI can detect such target but under 1.5 meters in air. Don't know.
Example could be:
- assuming the area exposed to induction is about 10cmx10cm
- a pulse star II can detect a 10cmx10cm square metal plate at 110cm (43'') using 2mx2m coil (from datasheet)
"what I believe and before this have told; physic science or physic logics has it's own esteem,
but experiences if not be standout, are not less important."
Yes, it's true. I think not everything was already discovered by science and also that good metal detecting
is a practice related task.
In future we'll discover new facts about physics or other sciences.
This don't mean that so-called-alternative science are all right or bad or nothing but commercial.
But without scientific evidences one cannot say - so a faith act must be performed.
I losed my faith in advertising so far ago.
My point of view is: many stuff out there simply don't works but sells. That's common in our world..
Best regards,
Max
Don't think so Max. Re-read Dell's post again.
"In conducting aerial surveys for gold deposits ..."
Why would he or anyone use a Geiger counter to look for Gold Deposits (unless per chance they are looking for Gold deposits heavily laced with radioactive material)?
It was only after the Gold deposit was roughly located (with undescribed instrumentation) that they would pollute the area with
low grade radioactive material. If he had been using a Geiger counter as you thought he was doing, then why bury low grade radioactive material at all? If the Geiger counter worked from the airplane, it would certainly work even better on the ground.
So no, it doesn't wash.
It would be a lot simpler, more benign to the environment and more energy efficient, if Dell would just use a lapis philosophorum to get his gold.
Hi Rudy,
yes maybe I have to read twice. Anyway, I don't say I belive in this "aerial surveys for gold deposits".
Yes I think also lapis philosophorum will be the right choice...ehm
but then , to have enough, you must perform first an "aerial surveys for lead deposits". :D
Best regards,
Max
Max, I'm sorry! I was wrong about you being able to think beyond the box. Your questions and hypothesis shows me you can't.
I do appreciate the information you generously shared. Dell
Hi Dell,
you are welcome.
But beyond the box ? That box has a name -science-.
With it we can do anything we know in our modern world. Science is freedom.
Freedom of our mind, freedom from diseases, freedom from heavy work, freedom from pain
and one can continue for long time...has also drawbacks but it's another story.
Example:
If a snake bite your leg where are you going if not to the nearest hospital ?
or rely on someone claims , say alternative scientist, - maybe putting some sacre words on
the leg or some snake oil maybe- ?
I think you'll go to the hospital very quickly, and without asking if it is "academic boxed"
science there!
What I want to say is that, as rational human beings,
WE KNOW WHAT WE DO, WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DON'T - ANY OF US KNOWS
- BUT SOMETIMES ONE TAKES THE RISK OF BUYING SOMETHING PROMISING APPARATUS...
but most important science is truth.
I mean not all the truth in a specific time, anyway not, but it's truth.
You can experiment and find that what's inside e.g. a physics book is real and repeat it as
times as you want. It reflects what we know about our world and how it works.
Man takes control of his destiny when realized he can workaround some human limitations
using his knowledge.
Advertising, instead, is, by definition, a false message, because the only target is to
make industry sell products and earn money, not to explain exactly what the product is or
it can really do.
Commercial info and advertising are not truth.
I don't belive in them.
But I must remember that this isn't a philosopy forum and we need to talk about
technical facts here. It's "geotechnology" not "geofaith".
I'm not a preacher. :nono:
Best regards,
Max
Sorry Rude-y, there can be no discussion with you. I don't see the respect, or the aptitude for you to think outside the academic box you have securely shackled yourself within.
I never said Gold, or any chemical element produced a "Field". I don't know if it does, or not. Nor, did I say the composition of the target "field" was any different from that of other Chemical elements. Dell
Candidate for the Dill Winders Crybaby thread
Max, I'm sorry! I was wrong about you being able to think beyond the box. Your questions and hypothesis shows me you can't.
I do appreciate the information you generously shared. Dell
Candidate for the Dill Winders Crybaby thread
okantex
02-01-2007, 11:20 AM
Hi Max
"Another issue is then the one related to IR detection. I've read a lot of posts regarding
IR detection using "leningrad 7" or something. Using an IR detector to find gold ???
"
I want to read that posts if it is possible.
can you give me links where you read posts.
and if you have documents about it can you mail me.
you have my mail address in your PM
thanks
Hi Max
"Another issue is then the one related to IR detection. I've read a lot of posts regarding
IR detection using "leningrad 7" or something. Using an IR detector to find gold ???
"
I want to read that posts if it is possible.
can you give me links where you read posts.
and if you have documents about it can you mail me.
you have my mail address in your PM
thanks
Hi Otantex,
I've seen your private message and replied. Take a look.
Best regards,
Max
Don't think so Max. Re-read Dell's post again.
"In conducting aerial surveys for gold deposits ..."
Why would he or anyone use a Geiger counter to look for Gold Deposits (unless per chance they are looking for Gold deposits heavily laced with radioactive material)?
It was only after the Gold deposit was roughly located (with undescribed instrumentation) that they would pollute the area with
low grade radioactive material. If he had been using a Geiger counter as you thought he was doing, then why bury low grade radioactive material at all? If the Geiger counter worked from the airplane, it would certainly work even better on the ground.
So no, it doesn't wash.
It would be a lot simpler, more benign to the environment and more energy efficient, if Dell would just use a lapis philosophorum to get his gold.
Hi Rudy,
read it again...
when he sayd :
"In conducting aerial surveys for gold deposits before GPS was available,
the instrumentation we used would detect and record Gold deposits but this
would only bring us in the proximity of the Gold for a ground search. "
seems that the general idea is :
from a plane they detected something by remote but without explaining
what kind of "instrumentation" was used, you are right
but so then
"
To locate the Gold deposit(s) we would bury 25 pounds of low grade Uranium ore in
2-3 locations within the general proximity of the aerial location, then wait 3-4 weeks.
The Uranium ore appeared to take on the characteristics of the Gold,
and metered the same as Gold with our instruments."
"wait 3-4 weeks." ???
"The Uranium ore appeared to take on the characteristics of the Gold,
and metered the same as Gold with our instruments." ???
what ? so I think he was talking about uranium/radiation propagation in the gold ore,
assuming, by this strange method, gold ore can manifest some particular and
detectable radioactive behaviour, and he've just mispelled saying that
"uranium ore appeared to take on the characteristics of the gold"
where would be gold take some radioactive behaviour...anyway
Why wait 3 or 4 weeks if not to last enough time for a kind of propagation ?
If so (::sarcasm::) one could setpoint the "instrument" to the uranium level (yeah!)
and detect gold position---> because they metered the same...uhm
Or the uranium-ore mutate in something else ???...ehm seems again we have to do with the famous lapis.
So uranium ore seems have two purposes:
1. mark known positions in the search field
2. create some kind of reaction with gold then they can discover exact gold ore position
comparing uranium-ore and unknown signals in the field
Because, if only 1. was needed (no GPS era), why to wait for 3-4 weeks ???
Are the 3-4 weeks that do ring a little bell in my head ah ah ah don't know you but for me this remote sensing thread is funny man! :lol:
Dell, where are you ? What do you mean for:
"To locate the Gold deposit(s) we would bury 25 pounds of low grade Uranium ore in
2-3 locations within the general proximity of the aerial location, then wait 3-4 weeks.
The Uranium ore appeared to take on the characteristics of the Gold,
and metered the same as Gold with our instruments."
Please explain better than this. Want to know exactly how you do these surveys.
and then
"
When we returned to the aera after an alloted time, we would detect the known locations
of the Uranium ore, as well as the unknown location of the Gold deposit, and by
calculating the distances between the known targets, and the unknown target we
could isolate and pinpoint the location of the Gold deposit.
"
pinpointing:
well this is clear enough and make sense, assuming the other stuff above,
but first one have to average locate the gold ore deposit,
that's what I can't realize how-to here.
Best regards,
Max
okantex
02-01-2007, 12:48 PM
I do respect
but not agree with you:nono:
okantex
02-01-2007, 12:49 PM
I do respect
but not agree with you:nono:
okantex
02-01-2007, 12:49 PM
I do respect
but not agree with you:nono:
michael
02-01-2007, 01:01 PM
Hi Max, thank you for your reasonable answer.
you mentioned don't know such detector be able to detect 12 gold coins in medium size.
Do you know OKM products or have experienced them? do you believe these detectors be able to do this job (e.g. exp series)? we know these devices just sense fields above ground very carefully.
I myself own a Rover C and have made many tests and had many expeditions
without any positive results for gold (master of non-magnetizing metals),and once have witnessed one medium size copper pot at 4.5 meters depth couldn't be detected by exp 4000 but Lorenze deepmax X3 detected that old buried object (of course not much old).
but with my high wonder, I saw one of my compatriots have detected some gold objects by his exp.
one of them is 12 gold coins in medium size at 340 Cm depth. or one small gold sheet(23 Cm) at 210 Cm depth.
before this I never believed these detector work for gold. now my opinion has been changed about them.
What can be scientific justification for this? can be one thing except to field shaped around gold?
please focus on this subject.
Carl-NC
02-01-2007, 01:49 PM
Michael,
I wouldn't rule out the possibility of being able to detect a handful of gold coins, or a 23cm sheet, at 2-3+ meters. Ferinstance, I suspect that an ordinary induction metal detector could be carefully made to do this in an air test, using extremely high power and critically-balanced coils. Whether this detector would still work with mineralized ground conditions is another matter.
It is also possible that the act of burial creates a local anomaly in the soil's magnetic signature, so with the right instrument (a detailed mapping mag, ferinstance) the burial spot would show up. This would happen regardless of what might have been buried, so technically it is not "detecting the gold." There are probably other possibilities.
If you have tested your Rover C on gold targets and got no positive results, then I suspect it is incapable of detecting gold targets. But maybe it is capable of detecting other signatures, like disturbed soil. Have you tried using it to map an area with known soil disturbances?
- Carl
Hi Max, thank you for your reasonable answer.
you mentioned don't know such detector be able to detect 12 gold coins in medium size.
Do you know OKM products or have experienced them? do you believe these detectors be able to do this job (e.g. exp series)? we know these devices just sense fields above ground very carefully.
I myself own a Rover C and have made many tests and had many expeditions
without any positive results for gold (master of non-magnetizing metals),and once have witnessed one medium size copper pot at 4.5 meters depth couldn't be detected by exp 4000 but Lorenze deepmax X3 detected that old buried object (of course not much old).
but with my high wonder, I saw one of my compatriots have detected some gold objects by his exp.
one of them is 12 gold coins in medium size at 340 Cm depth. or one small gold sheet(23 Cm) at 210 Cm depth.
before this I never believed these detector work for gold. now my opinion has been changed about them.
What can be scientific justification for this? can be one thing except to field shaped around gold?
please focus on this subject.
Hi Michael,
I never had experience with OKM products and can't say about.
For sure you have my attention when talking about of detecting 12 medium size gold coins
so deep underground (3.4 mt). I don't know if it's possible or not and how. Maybe, as
Carl suggest, some anomaly take place in these conditions.
"What can be scientific justification for this? can be one thing except to field shaped around gold?
please focus on this subject."
uhm
can be...can be... a lot of things there
I don't know Rover C. Can't say what its main detection system is supposed to do. But I know
Lorenz machines and like them.
The anomaly hypotesis seems a good starting point.
I know that in south america some ths use a kind of rod to sample the ground for small red/orange
fragments mixed with the soil. That is: it's common in some areas to find impurities where a hole
was dug in the ground. These impurities are a kind of markers that say "hey! the treasure is just
below your boots". Seems stupid things but it's true. There is ceramic mixed in the soil there.
This is absolutely true. They find treasures this way. This pits are, infact, graves.
When excavation was performed some particles contaminate the soil and also covering procedures
maked layers pattern different from sorrounding ground. This disturbance can create an hot spot
in the local magnetic permeability also. Buried stuff and soil movements can affect fieldlines.
Also electrostatic field may be affected - but don't know how to map this in a reliable way.
For sure not with a leaf electrometer (or a Tesla bla-bla ion chamber).
As many here know, ceramic could have magnetic behaviour - everyone can experiment with a sensible
pulse induction detector and some red bricks fragments.
No Meissner experiment required here, everyone can do:
I've build up some PIs and all of these sounds loud with red bricks. I own also small test fragments
gently donated by a friend - also ceramic pieces, very old, that sound like bricks.
Now, some strange ideas:
Say then we have a sensible magnetometer and we are making a map of the Eart's magnetic
field using a very strict pattern, say a grid with one sample every 10cm or so, in our field.
We maybe, like in other surveys, like e.g. resistivity metering, can end up with a
detailed map of "anomalies" in the field underground.
But in this case the procedure must be so systematic that very few people
would do...so if the mag was instead in on a semovent robot e.g. a small tank-like,
, with a motion reference system, well things can be more relaxing for the end user.
Simple application of the principle is used in commercial cut-grass-robots---not the ones
made in china i mean, but the serious japan made ones.
It's not like when a mag is used e.g. in underwater exploration (location of ship wrecks)
where one beep signals that a strong magnetic anomaly (e.g. a cannon) was revealed over
the ground threshold level. Here we must take care of details measuring so little spots
in the mag field that anything else but mapping is required.
One thing to take into account there will be that a precise mag for the purpose need to be
, maybe, a proton precession type. So an extra duty energy source is required.
The advantage is that a hi resolution can be obtained increasing the sampling rate - so an
intelligent device could switch in hi-res mode when something strange is detected.
So , also without discrimination, one can make hypothesis based on the shape of the anomaly,
like happens in GPR explorations.
But step back. Also T/R detectors can find similar anomalies out there. I mean cavity and/or
mag field abnormals spots. In this case one can't say nothing about what's there before
excavation.
So, the real problem is: in both cases, one must excavate to discriminate really.
Then no "real" discrimination.
---end of ideas
If I have to dig for some meters (hey!) getting an heartbreak , I want be sure there's not any
stupid paint can, that's what I say. I'm too young for getting one digging pits. :D
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-01-2007, 07:28 PM
Since many years, since the old forum, several times I was post about the anomalities. I call this phenomenom "electric field around conductive items buried for long time".
I'm not sure if science has interest in it of if the science can reproduce all this "microenviromental". Sure I found old buried metal (copper, bronze, silver and gold) with base open system, microvoltmeter. Also I know aluminium is very neutral, not at all, great quantity is another thing.
Round objects better!!! I conclude that the round objects "don't looses" the electric field easily regarding the form, the same effect you see in spheres, wich acquires charge and don't loose easily. This is in concordance with science.
The distance I achieve with microvoltmeter open base system was 80 meters for silver/bronze horse-chair adorns buried at 70 cm. Two green copper batteries clips, 40 meters, buried no more 10 cm depth, the both the same day. This was the first time I can conclude that the phenomenom is electric.
The illustrated report I can write regarding this phenomenom is very extense. At this time I don't have interest in any large report, since I'm not scientific, so this means no credit toward me, so, I'm not a reference. Also if I write a large report, this will stay "buried" for new threads and new members re-ask an re-discuss all the time. Great effort for nothing!
How I can demonstrate that the phenomenom is electric? Simple: if i shortcircuit the field, signal vanishes:
michael
02-01-2007, 07:55 PM
Carl,
I haven't tested Rover C on gold target as they claim these detectors can detect at least 10 Cm x 10 Cm x 30 Cm dimensions full of metal not hollow. then it's impossible to prepare such gold test target, but about iron yes, I did and after 2 years of bury I got result.
my wonder is about those really small gold targets despite the size that are even much smaller than the least size producer assigns.
about soil disturbances you are right, one example I have done is a well that the valve was about 1 meters underground and before I have put it in this forum and other forum now I again put it here (Well Scanned); interesting point is geographical directions; as you see the real form of well is seen just in N/S direction whereas in S/W direction from the same well you see as segmented form.
the showed depth was right.
but Carl, as my compatriot tells these detectors shows every anomaly in its' place very accurately i.e. he hasn't found golds via a cavity diagnosis when he sees the screen 100% can diagnose if it's metal or mineral or other thing. and he says Supersensor do discrimination 100% reliable.
He even says once he's found a shovel at 4 meters by Rover C deluxe. you know this is impossible for best metal detectors.
I myself have detected one iron target and software shows the depth at 3-4 meters. as it's in a parking lot not possible to dig there, but in field and desert still no real target.
Can be other than emanating field to ground surface?
now I'm somehow encouraged about my Rover C and I have decision to combine with my FG80 given signals just have to wait for spring.
I think OKM products detect field perpendicularly and mineoro do this job horizontally.
one other thing; last week we injected radio frequencies in soil and scanned ground by Rover C the results were somehow interesting. If you're interested in it, I'll put results here.
(about the test target buried 2 years ago)
Max, thanks for your comments, but one thing: I have one PI made here and it never beeps with bricks, ceramics or other things. just beeps for metals, but isn't much powerful. about discrimination the answer has given above ( By Supersensor).
I'm gathering my compatriot comments in Q & A form in one pdf file and put it here. it's a good subject for think about some hidden reals.
Sorry Rude-y, there can be no discussion with you. I don't see the respect, or the aptitude for you to think outside the academic box you have securely shackled yourself within.
I never said Gold, or any chemical element produced a "Field". I don't know if it does, or not. Nor, did I say the composition of the target "field" was any different from that of other Chemical elements. Dell
Direct quote from your previous post:
I would suggest that we are metering an emenating "field" rising from a target element to the surface of land, or water, and measurable above the earth in mass to at least 3,000 feet above the surface of the earth.
So, it is emanating from the target element, but it is not produced by it.
You talk in obscure riddles while saying .... nothing.
Rudy and Max, I again thank for your info and too repeat my question, why don't you desire to answer me?
I repeat it as perhaps was ignored(# 25):
Sorry Michael, I had missed your post before in all the clutter.
"one thing is brought up here: I want to ask from knowledgeable men about electronic ; Max, Rudy,.... Do you believe that old buried gold objects( not only gold, any kind of metal)
behave completely different than fresh ones? do you believe a few (e.g. 12) medium size gold coins be detectable at 3.5 meters by one device? Do you know this kind of detector or have you heard about?
There were several questions there. I'll answer in terms of Gold. It gets too complicated to mix in every metal into this.
The answer is: It depends on what type of behavior or property you are measuring.
If you are trying measure its electrical properties, like resitivity, yes, it would change given enough time, the presence of other chemicals, temperature and water. The gold could undergo a chemical reaction and form salts or other complexes and the resitivity would change.
Could you detect this change via remote (from far away) means? Possible but doubtful. Simply, there is too much other material in the way which would mask this change. You certainly could do a chemical assay of samples in a lab, but it hardly qualifies as remote sensing.
If you are trying to measure the "ionic" field remotely, the answer is no. For every electron that the gold ion has given up, there is a corresponding excess electron in the anion the gold cation is associated with. From a distance of several molecular diameters away, there is no measurable field. Quite simply, the "+" field of the gold ion is cancelled out by the "-" field of the associated cation forming the molecule.
Could you stimulate the gold electromagnetically by pumping energy into the ground? Certainly, that is how MDs work. The question is, how deep?
Here there are two issues: One is how much signal reaches back at you? The signal strength from the target propagates in all directions, not just in the direction of the detector. As such, the signal wavefront is spherical in nature and therefore the strength follows the inverse square law. One would be temtped to boost the amount of energy pumped into the ground to increased the strength of the received signal. The problem is that it is not just the gold that is reacting to the signal. All the minerals present react as well, so the "signal to noise" ratio is not improved. Kind of like driving through thick fog at night with the hi-beams on in the hope of seing better. Wether you use a VLF type technique to look at the target's resistance and permeability, or a PI, it is the same problem. You can tell that there are a lot of minerals present, but how to isolate the gold from it?
Do you really want to get a useful conclusion or not just to show your college info and cast those in our teeth? of course all of the forum members want to learn more, no doubt, and I'm always a learner without any arrogation, but you as physic analyzers please benefit us at least me from your field experiences.
before this thread I tried to get a conclusion, but one radical and crabby skeptic who disliked to get result, shifted from answers, bustled and took discussion to dispute, to nowhere.
I do not have any experience with Long Range Locators if that is what you are driving at. I work too hard for the money I earn to spend it on a box that claims to work in a manner that is not scientifically explainable, or that has been documented to work as advertised by an impartial panel of observers.
michael
02-02-2007, 08:33 AM
Thank you Rudy, but what I was driving at was not only for LRLs, also for all kind of detectors that being produced for treasure hunting purpose: dowsing rods, LRLs, MDs, GPRs or even Polaroid cameras.
one of them is OKM products that claim are GPR and we just know are surface field sensors not real GPR.
As I remember some guys here like me, Robert have used these detectors and believed they never work. I remember this from Robert about OKM future 2005 :" it just sucks" or other guy here that had buried a big iron barrel at 150 Cm depth, but got no signal. I know some other users in Europe( like England) have got no satisfying results and dislike these detectors.
as another side other users in other part of world are very satisfied.(am not making story) what's the real factor for these differences? weather and soil conditions? or not, a simple answer; there is no precious object they expect or other answer in backstage?
as Max mentioned it's impossible to detect 12 medium size gold coins at 3.4 m and there is no device be able to do this job.
and me thought so. and I think what is being seen in Polaroid pictures or what mineoro guys claim about emanating field can be true, otherwise what can cause one small earring be detectable at 140 Cm?
sometimes facts are another things in reverse side of we think, then we conclude should wash our eyes and watch from other side and angle. and reach to this point; maybe field experiences have supremacy to some scientific analysis (as Max mentioned too)
I put here my compatriot comments in PDF file for open-minded people just for think and reach to appropriate location for assessments.
Since many years, since the old forum, several times I was post about the anomalities. I call this phenomenom "electric field around conductive items buried for long time".
I'm not sure if science has interest in it of if the science can reproduce all this "microenviromental". Sure I found old buried metal (copper, bronze, silver and gold) with base open system, microvoltmeter. Also I know aluminium is very neutral, not at all, great quantity is another thing.
Round objects better!!! I conclude that the round objects "don't looses" the electric field easily regarding the form, the same effect you see in spheres, wich acquires charge and don't loose easily. This is in concordance with science.
The distance I achieve with microvoltmeter open base system was 80 meters for silver/bronze horse-chair adorns buried at 70 cm. Two green copper batteries clips, 40 meters, buried no more 10 cm depth, the both the same day. This was the first time I can conclude that the phenomenom is electric.
The illustrated report I can write regarding this phenomenom is very extense. At this time I don't have interest in any large report, since I'm not scientific, so this means no credit toward me, so, I'm not a reference. Also if I write a large report, this will stay "buried" for new threads and new members re-ask an re-discuss all the time. Great effort for nothing!
How I can demonstrate that the phenomenom is electric? Simple: if i shortcircuit the field, signal vanishes:
Hi Esteban,
I appreciate your experimenting and your way of testing different devices.
let's talk about:
"Sure I found old buried metal (copper, bronze, silver and gold) with base
open system, microvoltmeter."
well, under particular conditions, some ionization could happen, as I've told
some posts ago - also some spectral emission could appear but in any case the
target must be in a hi energized state.
Physics books call them (for ionizing) "ionization energy" and (for internal jumps of
electrons in outer orbitals) "energy pumping" process
, "energy pumping" is a term used in laser slang and the principle is the same of
hot spectroscopy using spectrometers...or also in a neon tube or in a mercury vapour
lamp...or whatever (there are a number of things out there using the same stuff)
--> one has to feed-in energy to make energetic "jumps" of electrons happen
So, if the detector don't send any radiation to the target (RX only) and is a simple
microvoltmeter or electrometer, the supposed electric field present must originate
from natural sources. Possible, but not really probable.
So then, if an electric field was generated we have another problem, as Rudy,
already explained:
"Could you detect this change via remote (from far away) means?
Possible but doubtful."
"If you are trying to measure the "ionic" field remotely, the answer is no.
For every electron that the gold ion has given up, there is a corresponding excess
electron in the anion the gold cation is associated with.
From a distance of several molecular diameters away, there is no measurable field.
Quite simply, the "+" field of the gold ion is cancelled out by the "-"
field of the associated cation forming the molecule."
Well, could some ion migration happen ? The answer is yes. Free electrons can move
but some kind of electric/magnetic force must be present here. The problem is that
electrons here are not in a vacuum tube and they are sorrounded by ground, so the
scenario is too complex to end up with a simple detection schema.
BUT Why a ionizing radiation, say natural gamma-ray from some radioisotope underground
would produce only gold or copper ionization, leaving any other thing sorrounding not
ionized ???
Things don't work like this. If a radiation ionize gold atoms is hi-probable that
many other stuff near gold are ionized too (or simply molecules break, like someone DNA).
To simplify words (I'll try to) is the same as you experience ionization and electrostatic
fields near your old TV tube after use and disconnected from mains...
your hairs are actrated ??? if you put pieces of paper are they attracted ??? if you put
say a small wood piece suspended by a spider web, is this attracted ??? if you put a leaf
electrometer --> what do the leafs - actracted each other ??? or deflected....
if you put in front of the tube your detector it say
that there would be gold inside your old TV tube ???
Would mean: everything that has a static charge interact with your ionized TV tube,
and any static field present (not only on metals) can be detected this way.
X-Ray emission is shielded but not enough to avoid this...gold detection.
So what one have to do ??? Digging the old TV for gold ???
Unfortunately, that's not a good idea, I think. But can change your life, too.;)
Returning serious:
"Round objects better!!! I conclude that the round objects "don't looses"
the electric field easily regarding the form, the same effect you see in spheres,
wich acquires charge and don't loose easily. This is in concordance with science."
Regarding the form ??? Ah, you maybe mean that sharp rods due to the charge density
gradient tend to behave different...simple words : charge is the same but more charges
in a small surface area makes more "concentration" then major "interactions":
like anti-lightening stuff. If it is so you are
right. But the spere is in the ground here and no ionization is probable. Any
discharge path is possible in ground - we have no insulated metallic spheres.
I think the purpose of Mineoro's so-called "ion-chamber" , visible in Aleximex's posts
pictures, is the like...a sort of spark gap with a sharp "injector" : but what it serves
for ??? amplifing electrical noise ??? Mr. Hertz would disapprove this.
Then
"How I can demonstrate that the phenomenom is electric?
Simple: if i shortcircuit the field, signal vanishes:
"
uhm
If I understand what's in your post...
if you have a conductor forming a short turn you have a coil and
if in that coil some current flows, you have a magnetic dipole. Just why the signal
have to vanish ??? What's the interaction between a (potential) mag dipole and the
supposed "electric field around conductive items buried for long time" ???
Your operator shorts the turn, then what ???
If a static field was present before shorting it'll be present after.
So, I think you detect not the supposed static field, but a magnetic interaction of
the "coil" with external magnetic radiating field (e.g. a radio station).
A small current flows in the coil , then the amplitude of the signal decrease in the
"rear" : it actually works much like a shield versus your broadband amplifier antennas.
I call it broadband amp becouse your microvoltmeter need hi-amplification (say 1000000)
and (must) have a large passband. Also your antenna set seems omnidirectional.
I want to say I appreciate you experiments in lr detection, but I think more physics
is needed to end up with a working long range detection system.
---
About Mineoro stuff i think:
if Mineoro's units work (don't know) it is not by electrometers, infrared, radiations, ions.
It'll becoming a restaurant menu list.
Best regards,
Max
Hi Esteban,
If a static field was present before shorting it'll be present after.
Yes. Partly correct. Esteban is right. When shotcircuiting the field it MOMENTARILY vanishes.
In fact for small objects, if a hole is partly digged, it's necessary to wait about 30 seconds for it to show up again. Body charges come into play here.
So, I think you detect not the supposed static field, but a magnetic interaction of
the "coil" with external magnetic radiating field (e.g. a radio station).
No. This is another thing.
but I think more physics
is needed to end up with a working long range detection system.
Physics related to this has always been available. It's only a matter of knowing how to apply it. Discussion here without the proper lab work and analysis accordingly will remain just that. Empty theory and rethorics.
---
About Mineoro stuff i think:
if Mineoro's units work (don't know) it is not by electrometers, infrared, radiations, ions.
It'll becoming a restaurant menu list.
Best regards,
Max
Assure yoursefl two things. First they do work, otherwise I could never detect gold from large distances which I do. Second, the working principle is electrostatic and ionic. Unless you actually accept this possibility and perform research on how this is possible, theorizing things only upon incomplete studies available will not be enough.
Regards.
Yes. Partly correct. Esteban is right. When shotcircuiting the field it MOMENTARILY vanishes.
In fact for small objects, if a hole is partly digged, it's necessary to wait about 30 seconds for it to show up again. Body charges come into play here.
No. This is another thing.
Physics related to this has always been available. It's only a matter of knowing how to apply it. Discussion here without the proper lab work and analysis accordingly will remain just that. Empty theory and rethorics.
---
Assure yoursefl two things. First they do work, otherwise I could never detect gold from large distances which I do. Second, the working principle is electrostatic and ionic. Unless you actually accept this possibility and perform research on how this is possible, theorizing things only upon incomplete studies available will not be enough.
Regards.
Hi Hung,
don't want you to upset. And for why...just for some physics?
Maybe my ideas doesn't care for you but facts remains facts,
anyway you swim around them.
Why don't you or any other win the $50.000 prize Carl gently offers ?
I just want to echange some informations. Nothing more.
So, turning back to the real problem,
I see on a czech web site this:
eXp 5000 for only 14.999 Eur
Do you think it works for the user? Because for the seller it works for sure.
And also for the manifacturer (OKM). No dubt.
Best regards,
Max
Hi Michael,
"maybe field experiences have supremacy to some scientific analysis (as Max mentioned too)"
I've just said that
"...also that good metal detecting
is a practice related task.
In future we'll discover new facts about physics or other sciences.
This don't mean that so-called-alternative science are all right or bad or nothing but commercial.
But without scientific evidences one cannot say - so a faith act must be performed."
It's different. Instead of what someone says, I think I'm open minded.
Just I want that these eventual new discoveries become scientific facts
before call them 'science'. No alternative science exist - only science.
"Alternative" would mean: I can't prove that fact so belive - faith - it exist
anyway with no scientific evidences.
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-02-2007, 03:52 PM
I'm explaining my experiences, sorry if my experiments is out your books. The problem is this: you pretend that this thinks must be in your books. If in the electronic courses (and physics books!) you don't find how to wind different kinds of coil and less how to build a metal detector (the books only refers types of detectors and functionment principles), of course is very far the possibility of long range detection. More: An only walkthrough metal detector schematic you can't find in this important site. Another thing: I'm speaking about an inherent electric field. The instant pulse ampliffier you need is more than 1,000,000 times. But if you study in old books you can find many things no present in "modern" books. (Also primitive induce high voltage PI detection since 1850.) Most of us here are reinventing the wheel and rediscovering the fire.
Other possibilitties are: detection via normal detector as long range (coil system), infrared, ultrasonic, radio, electric and radio prospecting:
Special articles and bulletins on electrical prospecting
- Electric waves to locate metals, Engineering and Minning Journal-Press, New York, June 13, 1925
- The search for covered orebodies, Technical Engineering News, Cambridge, Mass., January 1925
- Notes on Scientific Prospecting, Mountain States Mineral Age, Tabor Bldg., Denver, Colorado, February 1924
- Prospecting by radio, Engineering and Minning Journal-Press, New York, November 1924
- Geophysical Methods of Prospecting, Technical Paper 420, U.S. Bureau of Mines
- Geophysical Prospecting: Some Electrical Methods, Technical Paper 434, U.S. Bureau of Mines
- Geophysical Methods of Prospecting, by C. A. Heiland, Quarterly of the Colorado School of Mines, Vol. XXIV, Nº 1
Respect the challenge, I'm not playing in this style. We are speaking in different languages.:nono:
I'm explaining my experiences, sorry if my experiments is out your books. The problem is this: you pretend that this thinks must be in your books. If in the electronic courses (and physics books!) you don't find how to wind different kinds of coil and less how to build a metal detector (the books only refers types of detectors and functionment principles), of course is very far the possibility of long range detection. More: An only walkthrough metal detector schematic you can't find in this important site. Another thing: I'm speaking about an inherent electric field. The instant pulse ampliffier you need is more than 1,000,000 times. But if you study in old books you can find many things no present in "modern" books. (Also primitive induce high voltage PI detection since 1850.) Most of us here are reinventing the wheel and rediscovering the fire.
Other possibilitties are: detection via normal detector as long range (coil system), infrared, ultrasonic, radio, electric and radio prospecting:
Special articles and bulletins on electrical prospecting
- Electric waves to locate metals, Engineering and Minning Journal-Press, New York, June 13, 1925
- The search for covered orebodies, Technical Engineering News, Cambridge, Mass., January 1925
- Notes on Scientific Prospecting, Mountain States Mineral Age, Tabor Bldg., Denver, Colorado, February 1924
- Prospecting by radio, Engineering and Minning Journal-Press, New York, November 1924
- Geophysical Methods of Prospecting, Technical Paper 420, U.S. Bureau of Mines
- Geophysical Prospecting: Some Electrical Methods, Technical Paper 434, U.S. Bureau of Mines
- Geophysical Methods of Prospecting, by C. A. Heiland, Quarterly of the Colorado School of Mines, Vol. XXIV, Nº 1
Respect the challenge, I'm not playing in this style. We are speaking in different languages.:nono:
Hi Esteban,
I have already said that I respect your work, your experiments, your passion so I respect
you.
I'm sorry too that some stuff is not in my books and don't want to be offensive to anyone here but
I'm trying to rationally apply to this topic of remote sensing - "ion" detectors in this thread.
I've just used maybe too humor to relax the discussion a bit. I'm this way.
"The problem is this: you pretend that this thinks must be in your books."
I don't pretend nothing but understanding if that stuff out there works and how.
Because it costs. Costs many thousand dollars and sells and claims is capable to find
gold a kilometer underground. Is that not important ?
If so, I can also stop writing here and do anything else. Costs nothing.
To answer :
Obviusly, no physics book can tell anyone how to make an md coil or a pulse induction
circuit. This is not the point Esteban. Physics books teach physics, so principles:
application is a completely different story.
So maybe we can assume that this topic of constructing/experimenting with electronic circuits
is covered in electronics books, magazines, articles or any other kind of pubblication out there
regarding electronics not physics, including this forum.
Maybe EE books don't explain how to make a pulse induction but all electronics is a too big
universe for a kind of book. Maybe many of these lectures are required to make just a simple
circuit to be tuned properly. I own a lot of these. Read all of them. And physics also.
And more and more - but this is not the point again, Esteban.
The point is: this stuff works ??? if so, how ??? With pseudo-ion-
chambers ??? Nothing else.
"How" would mean that someone have to explain, in a scientific way, "how".
If you say "how metal detector works ?" there are explainations that make sense in physics terms.
Also for resistivity meters, magnetometers, GPR, side-sonars etc etc
So how ??? Mineoro, for instance, we see Aleximex posts and pictures and so ???
What's that stuff for ??? A PVC pipe is the magic sensor ???
I would understand, if it works, how.
Someone can explain ? There will be some kind of physics , or not ?
It's so hard to explain in a rational, educated, physical way ?
I've tryed to follow your experiments explaination just to understand the big picture of
what happeng e.g. shorting the turn etc in a scientific way.
"Another thing: I'm speaking about an inherent electric field. The instant pulse ampliffier
you need is more than 1,000,000 times. But if you study in old books you can find many things
no present in "modern" books. (Also primitive induce high voltage PI detection since 1850.)
Most of us here are reinventing the wheel and rediscovering the fire.
"
Don't know these but I'll take a look. Also at "Special articles and bulletins on electrical prospecting".
I own also old books but...someone say there, not too far ago, that lead can mutate in
gold. Others that say you can put asbestos in your mouth to seal teeth-holes. Yes.
We are in 2007 now - and some physics (and medicine) are far ahead.
Rediscovering the fire ? Why ?
Would be an unuseful discovery. Someone else has the patent (prometeus).
Maybe you mean discovering something hidden or misunderstud. If it so, good luck.
Best regards,
Max
Delbert grady
02-02-2007, 08:34 PM
In past times there was not so much trouble from Dicky Spy’s. They just could not operate so easily as they do today. But they were about as can be seen by the streaks
On many old photographs. I did a lot of photography in the past and did not realize till many years later that it was the pesky Dicky Spy’s that were causing the streaks on otherwise good photographs. Now days I like to search for gold using the FG80 long range locator. But the large number of Dicky Spy’s in Europe are making these devices unusable. I have not had any signals at all for months. To be honest I have never had a signal. Unless something can be done about D/S I can see no future for long range locating in Europe.
In past times there was not so much trouble from Dicky Spy’s. They just could not operate so easily as they do today. But they were about as can be seen by the streaks
On many old photographs. I did a lot of photography in the past and did not realize till many years later that it was the pesky Dicky Spy’s that were causing the streaks on otherwise good photographs. Now days I like to search for gold using the FG80 long range locator. But the large number of Dicky Spy’s in Europe are making these devices unusable. I have not had any signals at all for months. To be honest I have never had a signal. Unless something can be done about D/S I can see no future for long range locating in Europe.
Hi Delbert,
I had lot of experience with old photographics paper too and had a number of "spots"
and "shapes" on , but simply because of the process. I never found anything following
a spot in a photo. Don't think anyone can do.
It's the same on TV shows where someone say "hey! this is the gost of Mr. Nicola
Tesla in this photo" - and the table bumps - and the like.
I don't know if any kind of (new or non science recognized) energy could be radiate by
an object - say a gold bar. For me, this kind of "reading" is like to guess numbers
to win the yearly lottery, unless someone with a good, rational, scientific explaination
gives it sense if any.
I've read something about Kirlian's effect on some books. Also that it was lot of
experiments in the soviet union on the topic. Where west-world ever dislike to treat Tesla
stuff in scientific consideration but for only some few patents and magnetic units.
There is a reason: some Tesla stuff is not scientific at all and will never work.
Let's back to Kirlian.
Here a kind of generator (tesla like) radiates rf waves in the air, using a continuos
Hi-voltage spark, like a lightening, then the object (that can be also a human being),
re-irradiate its own Kirlian pattern (so called "aura") outside and a camera can
photograph the pattern.
But then no one say that is an harmful and dangerous procedure, that everything radiate
an "aura" outside, that no discrimination is possible, that patterns are not predictable,
etc etc etc is like an UV photography of your face (those whatching BBC knows what I say).
So, I think this kind of stuff it's a kind of magic if intended to find something
(or someone). Like (at the moment) dowsing. Like LRL in general. Like remote-vision.
Like other magic of crystals...
I'm skeptic in LRL, Mineoro etc etc etc because they seems (for my understanding) poor
electronics with no apparent sense but earning money from some enthusiast new-age fellow.
If anyone can explain scientifically if any device work and how I'll change my point of view.
I'm open minded.
But, seems that no one untill now can explain nothing in a rational and scientifical way on
these topics of "remote sensing".
At least, Kirlian's effect is real though unuseful! Everyone can experiment with a bunch of
cables, coils, mosfets, TS555 and a stupid (now useless also) polaroid.
One can see the light !
"I have not had any signals at all for months. To be honest I have never had a signal. "
If these are the results, I hope you don't bought this Mineoro-FG80 !
Best regards,
Max
Hi all,
I've read about Dobler studies at
http://www.rexresearch.com/dobler/dobler.htm
for those interested in the topic I've matured a possible conclusion about.
At first I had some dubts but then following the test procedures...uhm
Let's explain.
he said in his work (year 1934) called
"Physical & Photographic Proof of Radiation from the Earth
Solution to the Problem of Divining Rods
"
this:
"
(1) Photographic Proof of the Radiation of Underground Watercourses
In order to prove the origin of the sensitive bands, the radiation of underground
watercourse photographically, I performed the following test:
On the drilled Rohrbach source that was already mentioned, I placed photographic
plates 18 m deep in the earth, but could not determine any sort of general density
after their development. Only at once place of the developed plates for all the
exposures could some small dark points be seen. For a long time I could not explain
the appearance of these points. It could not have been a defect in the plates because
the points could be seen in different forms on the plates. Finally I found a solution
to the puzzle. I had used a double cassette for the exposures, whose dividing wall
consisted of an enameled aluminum plate. There, where the noticeable points were
found, the lacquered electroplating of the aluminum was damaged through the insertion
of the plates. The bare aluminum had affected the photographic plates when they were
placed over the underground watercourse. Further test showed that the density did not
occur when the same cassette was stored with the photographic plate in the darkroom;
here the radiation of the underground watercourse was not suspended. ..."
and so a lot of tests that seems indicate some kind of revealing due (he said)
to rf generated by water micro-wirlpools and hits underground.
Assuming the material there on rexresearch is authentic and also translation in
english is well done, and that Dr. Dobler was intellectual honest
--> something must have to produce the white strips in his photographic plates.
But what ? the water (*) itself ?
I think the response is, in this specific case (*), yes.
The experiments were done with thin emulsion photographic plates and strip of metals,
expecially aluminium. Aluminium was coated with a kind of enamel also. Only edges of
aluminium strips were bare. It was putted on the plate and then plate and strip were
covered with black paper so as to make them lightproof. Then placing a test plate near
the water flow at different distancies and another reference plate, prepared in the same
way, in a darkroom far from the water source.
Well, a suitable testing method.
Seems he gets some interesting plates there, with strange strips that impress the
plates near the, both, underground flowing and above the surface water flow.
Leaving 24hours or so a kind of reaction occourred, marking the white strips in
correspondance of the bare edges of the aluminum strip.
I think it was possible and that experiments can be preformed to confirms that this
behaviour can be detected in similar conditions.
How ? Scientifically ? Here is my hypothesis:
1. local water there in Heilbronn, Germany could be contamained by radon gas (Rn),
the region there is famous for thermal activity and salts mines
- Rn-gas is a strong gamma-rays emitter - and it's infrequent that Rn could be
found in thermal water (it also happens in commercial mineral water)
2. Dr. Dobler maybe don't know that Rn was present underground or near the surface
diffused by water were he did his experiments (Rn is really heavy gas)
3. Rn gamma-ray emission is strong and also "few" particles of gas can produce a
photographic reaction (some dosimeters works like this)
4. some kind of interaction appears to make "density" anomaly at bare edges of the
aluminum strip
For point nr. 4 I think gamma rays ionized some aluminum atoms and charge diffusion
appears in the aluminum (free electrons), so sharp bare edges act there as an electric
lens, due to the higher charge density, to deflect some beta emission also present for
same reasons (water flows contamained by small ammounts of radioactive elements) or by
secondary radiations induced by gamma rays.
This could explain why inner aluminum does not exibit concentration in white spots, and
why instead these white spots and stripes are in correspondance of the edges of the
aluminum strip.
Radon was discovered in 1898 but its presence was unknown in natural water till 50's
because it was considered only a rare radium ore subproduct at that time and in 30's.
Does it could makes sense now ? It's better than say , in physics terms,
"water wirlpools caused this..." (hey!).
(*) means not the water itself only do this stuff...but some radon or other
atoms-molecules-ions transported by the water flow.
This, anyway, doesn't mean that natural radiations, where present, could be used to find anything
underground as already known.
Best regards,
Max
robby_h
02-04-2007, 01:51 AM
It is simple. Hung, Dell and all other believers should get a three-month visa and bring their LRLs here to Australia. If these gadgets work as well as they say then they will go home rich. There is an enormous amount of ground here that should have gold nuggets of 50 ounce upwards. Bucket dredges have worked large flat plains but the overhead sent them broke. These dredges often encountered extraordinary rich pockets of gold and were still doing this up until they shut down. If you could pinpoint these relatively shallow pockets then you would be rich as you wouldn't need to run the dredge on all of the unpayable ground in-between. We have an enormous area here that is covered in bulldust and rich deposits are only discovered if a large tree is uprooted in a storm, revealing the gold bearing ore in the roots. Some large mines in Victoria encounter masses of gold worth $300,000 when simply putting in an access drive. You could get rich alone by picking the ones they miss. The mine owners would pay you a fortune!
It's rather cruel that Australian advertising and retail law prohibits the sale of these devices here. :rolleyes:
The "Hand Of Faith" nugget was only six inches deep and would have been a snap! Trees get blown over in our vast desert areas and the roots reveal vast rich gold deposits hidden by a 4' layer of dust. A plumber digs a ditch and finds a 150-ounce nugget. A farmer digs a new dam and detectors bring up numerous nuggets up to 118 ounces. A new road gets put in and detector operators get hundreds of ounces from what are often shallow scrapings. Wet claims in rich areas reveal extremely rich pockets of coarse gold in ground only 8' deep but the strip ratio makes it unprofitable. I can't understand why the owners of these units (and the inventor) aren't here instead of looking for a jar full of old coins? :shocked:
Puzzled Rob.
Dell Winders
02-04-2007, 02:59 AM
Actually Robby, my products were permitted to advertise in Australia. One small mining company would send me photos of Gem stones they were recovering located with a Frequency Discriminator. Another customer visiting Australia sent me a photo of a 14 oz. gold nugget he found.
"What has been done, can be done" Dell
Chris2
02-04-2007, 05:41 AM
Hi Robby,
you are right! If I'm would be an inventer/manufacturer of a device that really works and can find gold, I would not advertise it. I would not try to convince people to buy it. I would do out and dig for the treasure myself. Australia is known for gold nuggets and this would be the first place I go. Only if I know that I try to sell a "dream" I would advertise for it...and wait until I sell a unit to a dreamer.
Chris
Hi Robby and Chris (and hi Dell too),
I agree with the idea that anyone out there having such a detector don't need at all to
convince someone to buy one.
"If I'm would be an inventer/manufacturer of a device that really works and can find gold,
I would not advertise it. I would not try to convince people to buy it. I would do out
and dig for the treasure myself. Australia is known for gold nuggets and this would be
the first place I go."
Yes. Absolutely. I totally agree.
I think Australia is the best place on the Earth for a passioned THer. :D
Not hystorical/human made stuff, yeah, but a lot of minerals to play with...
gold deposits, gems, etc a very good place for any geo-degree also and for
those that loves nature and open spaces.
Anyway, I think these devices don't work but can't say for sure.
I think most of them are simply broadband amplifiers that actually detects nothing or
anything, making them unuseful in treasure hunting (and in anything else).
I'm interested in OKM claims at now. Read some documentation and their products seem
something better than "gold-pistols". Anyway, they claim their products have GPR, but
I don't know how a ground pen. radar can fit into a small and light detector like they
say. I think there isn't any radar at all in OKMs, but like someone wrote only mag and
other "anomaly" revealers plus a pulse induction md.
I'm interested but really skeptic on "remote sensing" topic. OKM seems, for some aspects,
to fall into remote sensing too.
Too long unexplained detection range. Too unexplained discrimination of metals.
I don't belive they can work like claimed.
Are they selling dreams ? For sure, if I have to spend 14.999eur for a piece of electronics
that finds only ratholes...well it could be a nightmare! Someone said they don't work like
claimed so I think my wallet will remain closed for OKM, at least untill they really say
what's inside the box - the truth I mean -.
When these manifactures are pushed on technologies they say "own proprietary technology - can't
talk about" or "dobler's waves" or "ulf detector" or anything but not simply explain what's
inside the box. Aleximex shows us interesting stuff - PVC handmade "ion-chamber".
I prefer a small detection range metal detector that works for sure instead of an unbelivable
rathole or worm (yes also worms) detector.
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-04-2007, 06:00 PM
I can't understand why the owners of these units (and the inventor) aren't here instead of looking for a jar full of old coins? :shocked:
Puzzled Rob.
Ask the same question to Mr. Fisher, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Etc.: why they don't became rich searching for jar full of coins?
Are they trying another systems? In 20 years, no great advances in classical MD they achieve, maybe in design, in target shower, in "hot" search head, in bla, bla, etc. You can reduce each day the noise in op amps, but the next 20 years you can't achieve significative advances in depth.
Imagine this: today you buy a "new detector", "very modern", manufactured by famous brand, but you comprobe that your old detector of "X" brand is better that you new purchases. So, are the manufacturer to defraud you? Why the manufacturer don't search in another way?
Most of the jar full of coins histories are folklore, in the real life you have a very but very little possibility for to find a real treasure. And the manufacturers provide us (the dreamers) the tools for to find it.
Dell Winders
02-04-2007, 06:08 PM
What a pity. Those Skeptics who invoke Science, hypocritically rebuke Science in the name of Skepticism, and exhibit themselves as examples of,
"THE DOOR TO KNOWLEDGE & UNDERSTANDING IS NEVER OPEN TO A CLOSED, OR PREJUDICED MIND. Dell
Qiaozhi
02-04-2007, 10:11 PM
What a pity. Those Skeptics who invoke Science, hypocritically rebuke Science in the name of Skepticism, and exhibit themselves as examples of,
"THE DOOR TO KNOWLEDGE & UNDERSTANDING IS NEVER OPEN TO A CLOSED, OR PREJUDICED MIND. Dell
:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:
Have you been drinking? This doesn't even make sense.
I put here my compatriot comments in PDF file for open-minded people just for think and reach to appropriate location for assessments.
Unfortunately your compatriot's opinion of the OKM devices cannot be taken seriously. He believes that the Lectra actually works, and even says "I believe Lectra search has been the best device for me... If weather be good, Lectra works as best device."
Enough said. :razz:
"THE DOOR TO KNOWLEDGE & UNDERSTANDING IS NEVER OPEN TO A CLOSED, OR PREJUDICED MIND. Dell
This reads like it came out of a fortune cookie. :lol:
Carl-NC
02-05-2007, 04:31 AM
Carl,
I haven't tested Rover C on gold target as they claim these detectors can detect at least 10 Cm x 10 Cm x 30 Cm dimensions full of metal not hollow. then it's impossible to prepare such gold test target, but about iron yes, I did and after 2 years of bury I got result.
Well, if the Rover C is really a mag, then iron shouldn't be a problem. To simulate gold, use lead or aluminum ingots. They should produce a response similar to gold.
He even says once he's found a shovel at 4 meters by Rover C deluxe. you know this is impossible for best metal detectors.But maybe not impossible for a good mag.
- Carl
michael
02-05-2007, 05:32 AM
Carl, about iron maybe you're right, but about other objects what do you tell?
Have you taken a look at the PDF file? no doubt OKM devices are field sensors (maybe magnetometer is better phrase), but how can feel gold(of course very ancient buried)?
we tell those feel fields above ground, OK, then can conclude very old buried gold definitely has a specific field? how they detect gold so well?
Can we tell they detect metals much better than non-magnetic metals or for precious metals a long tome should be passed over burial?
specific field as their supersensor can discriminate it.
What's justification for detection one small single earring at 140 Cm or 12 medium size gold coins inside a stone at 340 Cm?
Carl, do you deliberately behave selectively and omit those parts you reluct of?
I mentioned producer tells these detectors can detect at least 10 Cm x 10 Cm x 30 Cm dimensions full of metal not hollow, nevertheless you see there are founds so much smaller than supposed mass!!!!
Still I haven't seen convincing answer.
I can't understand why the owners of these units (and the inventor) aren't here instead of looking for a jar full of old coins? :shocked:
Puzzled Rob.
Ask the same question to Mr. Fisher, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Etc.: why they don't became rich searching for jar full of coins?
Are they trying another systems? In 20 years, no great advances in classical MD they achieve, maybe in design, in target shower, in "hot" search head, in bla, bla, etc. You can reduce each day the noise in op amps, but the next 20 years you can't achieve significative advances in depth.
Imagine this: today you buy a "new detector", "very modern", manufactured by famous brand, but you comprobe that your old detector of "X" brand is better that you new purchases. So, are the manufacturer to defraud you? Why the manufacturer don't search in another way?
Most of the jar full of coins histories are folklore, in the real life you have a very but very little possibility for to find a real treasure. And the manufacturers provide us (the dreamers) the tools for to find it.
Hi Esteban and all,
I agree on many points here.
"Ask the same question to Mr. Fisher, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Etc.: why they don't became
rich searching for jar full of coins?"
Yes, true. But conventional metal detectors are not claimed to find gold or anything
at greater depth. Best results are with pulse induction but a pi can't "really" discriminate
between gold and other metals (but just make good guessing by multi-frequency and software).
But these detectors actually detect metals, though at low depth and with limited discrimination.
Manifacturers know their products limitations and also push on "false" advertising.
why they don't became
rich searching for jar full of coins?
YES: this is the point.
Because they don't sell a general purpose long range gold detector --> if they have one
I think they liked to find gold and treasures directly not to sell anything to others.
They know their machines can enrich (for sure) them only by selling to THs community.
Is like with the "old West gold run" or "Klondicke -write right ?- gold run"
--> many searchers never found any big ammount of gold, just only few grams, and who
enrich were (for sure) who selled showels and pickaxes or any other "product" and
"service" to the THs community there.
"Are they trying another systems? In 20 years, no great advances in classical MD they
achieve, maybe in design, in target shower, in "hot" search head, in bla, bla, etc.
You can reduce each day the noise in op amps, but the next 20 years you can't achieve
significative advances in depth."
Yes, true. Op amp ar fairly less noisy vs old fashioned uA709 or similar. Achieving
significative advances in depth is not linearly related to op-amp noise. We must consider
sinal-to-noise ratio: if noise reduce one could think s/n improve and that's true, but
unfortunately, with conventional mds, signal strenght reduces by non linear relation with
distance from the target.
So one must put enormous signals to reach some inches deeper targets, as you already know.
Even mounting very low noise amplifiers.
R/D is difficault when one have to do with exponential signal attenuation. Simply, this
technology can't be pushed ahead with conventional newer electronics only. R/D costs a lot
and I think they don't want to waste huge ammount of money where they already know that are
huge limitations and they can continue selling actual mds.
If someone doesn't break the wall with a new kind of promising technology they wouldn't
play any role making new stuff.
"
Imagine this: today you buy a "new detector", "very modern", manufactured by famous brand,
but you comprobe that your old detector of "X" brand is better that you new purchases.
So, are the manufacturer to defraud you? Why the manufacturer don't search in another
way?"
Actually yes, if they claim impossible results with newer machines. But many of these
just talk generically of improvements! So, generally speaking, they don't.
Searching in another way ? I think they've tested a huge number of LRL and endly convinced
that this technology doesn't work or doesn't suitable in their "brand" detectors.
Their stuff MUST work - even at low depth - because they have a NAME/BRAND to defend.
I think they prefer staying with what they already have and just follow the components
evolution -e.g. microprocessors and dsp-.
"Most of the jar full of coins histories are folklore, in the real life you have a very
but very little possibility for to find a real treasure. And the manufacturers provide us
(the dreamers) the tools for to find it."
Yes, true. It's really low probable that one TH find a treasure like "a jar of coins".
But I know many (10+) in UK find these (big) jars, with ancient silver and gold roman coins:
I know that someone sell them (10000+) to the British Museum (London) based on what the
Treasure Act law tell about. Discoveries near the Adrian's "Wall" are frequent.
Many discoveries were with simple and old VLF mds.
Anyone can confirm ?
And yes, true, I think most of us are dreamers. Dreams cost nothing.
Best regards,
Max
Carl, about iron maybe you're right, but about other objects what do you tell?
Have you taken a look at the PDF file? no doubt OKM devices are field sensors (maybe magnetometer is better phrase), but how can feel gold(of course very ancient buried)?
we tell those feel fields above ground, OK, then can conclude very old buried gold definitely has a specific field? how they detect gold so well?
Can we tell they detect metals much better than non-magnetic metals or for precious metals a long tome should be passed over burial?
specific field as their supersensor can discriminate it.
What's justification for detection one small single earring at 140 Cm or 12 medium size gold coins inside a stone at 340 Cm?
Carl, do you deliberately behave selectively and omit those parts you reluct of?
I mentioned producer tells these detectors can detect at least 10 Cm x 10 Cm x 30 Cm dimensions full of metal not hollow, nevertheless you see there are founds so much smaller than supposed mass!!!!
Still I haven't seen convincing answer.
Hi Michael,
if your data are exact I think it was not an MD but something between a mag and an anomaly revealer. I wrote about possible anomalies in a previous post.
" mentioned producer tells these detectors can detect at least 10 Cm x 10 Cm x 30 Cm dimensions full of metal not hollow, nevertheless you see there are founds so much smaller than supposed mass!!!!"
It depends on many factors: e.g. for a pi detector is not different to "see" an iron thick foil (say 3mm) 10cm^2 or an iron block 10cm^2 (30mm long) exposed to induction, at say 1meter, signal is similar. What's matter is conductivity and shape/dimension seen by the coil in great depth.
Pi work on eddy currents and if these can flow in a major issue is "exposed area of metal" to induction. The more the surface exposed, at same depth, the more the signal.
One can experiment using a coin facing plate and border to the coil. Mass and distance is the same but signal received is less with 90 degree orientation, where is maximum with the coin facing the coil.
Eddy currents are flowing in a path...so a facing coin expose more area then more possible paths, then they are stronger this way. Consider field lines parallel each other here.
"What's justification for detection one small single earring at 140 Cm or 12 medium size gold coins inside a stone at 340 Cm?"
But at your distances, something else be used. Don't know what. Don't know how.
Best regards,
Max
Actually Robby, my products were permitted to advertise in Australia.
Were permitted until the Aussie's caught onto your scam?
One small mining company would send me photos of Gem stones they were recovering located with a Frequency Discriminator. Another customer visiting Australia sent me a photo of a 14 oz. gold nugget he found.
I would guess these two examples can be confirmed by....well, nobody? :nono:
What a pity. Those Skeptics who invoke Science, hypocritically rebuke Science in the name of Skepticism, and exhibit themselves as examples of,
So...we’re gonna get a big whoppin' spiel about how science has claimed your wonderful do-nothing devices work, eh? :barf:
Hi all,
this seems interesting (2002 stuff anyway):
http://www.minerals.csiro.au/main/pg2.asp?id=36060
Take a look. At least, even if it cookes someone, ehm ...this is science
:D
Best regards,
Max
michael
02-05-2007, 06:13 PM
Unfortunately your compatriot's opinion of the OKM devices cannot be taken seriously. He believes that the Lectra actually works, and even says "I believe Lectra search has been the best device for me... If weather be good, Lectra works as best device." Enough said. :razz:Qiaozhi,I personally don't like such detectors( Electroscopes or Lectrasearch) and have mentioned before in this forum and in attached file and have no decision to advocate them or producers.
But I'm sure he tells all truth and there is no reason for him to scatter some lies and despite my verdict about Lectra I respected his opinion and experiences, the job that seems you can't do. in spite of my previous idea about you, it appears you are narrow-minded. I didn't put the file to start some absurd disputes, put it in purpose of rationally discussing instead of shoot to door and wall.
one thing I forgot to put in comments is that he has bought both models of OKM long range detectors and wrote for me he never got result of first model(Bionic Alpha) and is waiting for spring to test the second model (Bionic 01 ). now why to lie about Lectra? for making money? or other thing? Oh, you can speculate miraculously, find reason at least for me.
why does he tell against this kind of LRD?
When you encountered to dead end to explain, at least behave rationally.
Have you yourself ever used Lectra or not, express so that it's unacceptable based on your theoretical info?
Here is the place I figure out again; experiences (objectives) are supreme to theories ( subjective), however you try to belittle comments, bash or pull the debate to nowhere. If you can't accept one thing, don't deny it. to accept mistakes bravely is dignity.
Qiaozhi, it would be better for you to learn to respect people than electronic which close your mind. instead of putting absurd emoticons: :razz: :razz: :razz: :razz: Enough seen.
Max, Thank you for your patiently and reasonably explanations I appreciate those.
Qiaozhi
02-05-2007, 11:54 PM
Qiaozhi,I personally don't like such detectors( Electroscopes or Lectrasearch) and have mentioned before in this forum and in attached file and have no decision to advocate them or producers.
But I'm sure he tells all truth and there is no reason for him to scatter some lies and despite my verdict about Lectra I respected his opinion and experiences, the job that seems you can't do. in spite of my previous idea about you, it appears you are narrow-minded. I didn't put the file to start some absurd disputes, put it in purpose of rationally discussing instead of shoot to door and wall.
one thing I forgot to put in comments is that he has bought both models of OKM long range detectors and wrote for me he never got result of first model(Bionic Alpha) and is waiting for spring to test the second model (Bionic 01 ). now why to lie about Lectra? for making money? or other thing? Oh, you can speculate miraculously, find reason at least for me.
why does he tell against this kind of LRD?
When you encountered to dead end to explain, at least behave rationally.
Have you yourself ever used Lectra or not, express so that it's unacceptable based on your theoretical info?
Here is the place I figure out again; experiences (objectives) are supreme to theories ( subjective), however you try to belittle comments, bash or pull the debate to nowhere. If you can't accept one thing, don't deny it. to accept mistakes bravely is dignity.
Qiaozhi, it would be better for you to learn to respect people than electronic which close your mind. instead of putting absurd emoticons: :razz: :razz: :razz: :razz: Enough seen.
Max, Thank you for your patiently and reasonably explanations I appreciate those.
As you said yourself - "I personally don't like such detectors( Electroscopes or Lectrasearch) and have mentioned before in this forum and in attached file and have no decision to advocate them or producers." - so we are in agreement. ;) I am just mystified that you are able to trust the opinion of someone who believes that these fake devices are capable of detecting anything, apart from money in other people's pockets. If that is narrow minded, then so be it. By the way, I didn't say he was lying, just misguided.
robby_h
02-06-2007, 02:42 AM
Dell,
"Actually Robby, my products were permitted to advertise in Australia". Past tense?
Nobody is allowed to advertise these products here. There was a guy in Victoria and one in NSW (Ranger) advertising these things on EBAY recently but I reckon this will be stopped. It's becoming a bit hard to police though.
You can buy a "lucky rabbit's foot" key chain, crystals to put under you pillow and an open circuit L/R thingy hooked to a chain with an insulated link and a metal frame pyramid to sit under though! No Oz MD retailer stocks or advertises any LRL type devices at all.
Individuals here have found literally thousands of nuggets with a MD. The LRL type devices I've seen have found none and in one area that has since produced enough nuggets to make anyone happy including at least one 80 ounce nugget at 12" that MDs before the SD2000 couldn't hear because of ground noise. The LRL guy walked over and around the 80-ounce nugget and all the others for two days.
This begs the question, if a MD is required to verify the presence of a nugget after your thingy beeps then would you be still willing to put a hole down in our rock hard ground (and where?) if the MD couldn't hear a signal?
"One small mining company would send me photos of Gem stones they were recovering located with a Frequency Discriminator. Another customer visiting Australia sent me a photo of a 14 oz gold nugget he found."
Really? "Frequency Discriminator"?? And past tense? A one-off in an area where one would expect such a find and was a metal detector involved in the nugget's recovery? Was this claim verified? Do you have any idea of how quickly this news would travel thru the goldfields? You would never keep up with demand if this was true.
Esteban,
"Ask the same question to Mr. Fisher, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Etc.: why they don't became rich searching for jar full of coins?"
At least Mr Fisher (and others) have been actively involved in well documented recovery of treasure and it is clear that their MD designs work and actually show the presence of a target and indicate where to dig. None of this... "I got a beep that shows conclusively that there is treasure at 100 feet somewhere under a mountain or somewhere in a cave" and walk off claiming this is proof.
"Are they trying another systems? In 20 years, no great advances in classical MD they achieve, maybe in design, in target shower, in "hot" search head, in bla, bla, etc. You can reduce each day the noise in op amps, but the next 20 years you can't achieve significative advances in depth."
At least we can clearly show why it is so hard to improve on present designs.
"Imagine this: today you buy a "new detector", "very modern", manufactured by famous brand, but you comprobe that your old detector of "X" brand is better that you new purchases. So, are the manufacturer to defraud you? Why the manufacturer don't search in another way?"
At least they can be shown to actually work and don't rely on Karma or humidity or whether you poke your tongue out to the left or right!!! By the way, if you pick the middle of winter for your visa then you will be assured of bone-dry air in most of our richer goldfields so humidity won't bother you at all.
Dell,
We aren't asking for much. We buy a car and it gets us from A to B. We are just asking for similar, reasonable proof that these LRL devices work.
It's very simple (or should be). If I sent one back to you because I thought it was faulty then how would you test it? Tell us so we can conduct the same real and meaningfull tests for ourselves. Just give us what you would expect from the manufacturer of any other device.
Your claims and arguments just don't make any sense to anyone in the real world. We can't use conventional wisdom, proven science or anything that could be remotely mistaken for logic when debating this subject as you find this totally unacceptable. It seems that sceptics are obviously disadvantaged by having active frontal lobes and you appear to be asking us to disable these so that we can reason as you do!
Still puzzled but soon to be lobotomised,
Rob.
Hi all,
though serves nothing, I've another scenario for the Dobler's experiments.
Though very schematic (and poor artistic):
Fig.1 describes materials used
Fig.2 describes the test materials hitted by natural gamma-ray
Fig.3 describes free electrons generation in Al strip
What's important are Fig.4 and Fig.5.
Fig.4 is my first hypotesis on white strips generation:
gamma-rays generates free electrons, then density of these are higher on sharp edges.
Total potential is obviously zero, because for each free electron there is an Al "ion",
well not actually a ion, because it's a metal matrix and electrons can move easy anyway,
but , energetic exchange happen between hitting gamma-ray and electrons that are in.
Ionization occours in the matrix because Al atoms can't mantain their external electrons
bounded, and free electrons accumulate over the surface.
But also if total potential is zero , charge density on surface is different and higher
on sharp edges: it can act as an electric lens (like old crt deflectors or so called Braun's
tubes).
If any charged particle (not gamma-ray) say beta or alpha pass enough near the "deflector"
it will be repelled or actracted. If it is so, a "concentration" appear near the bare edges
due to the higher hit number of particles and emulsion in the photographic plate.
Here, like i said in previous post, gamma-rays only don't make the white strips appear,
but a secondary radiation (beta or alpha or both) must be present to explain what's going
on.
Fig.5 is my second hypothesis that, though not in contrast with the first, can explain how
white strips generation could happen ONLY with incident gamma-rays.
Here electric charges are not important.
This behaviour was discovered by Roentgen, during his X-Rays studies. He used photographic
plates (what a coincidence!) in black lightproof paper and radioactive ores to stimulate
photographic reations.
He found that alpha, beta and gamma-rays can create photoreactions directly as also catode
ray tubes (Roentgen effect, 1895).
X-rays can be generated by "hits" of beta (hi speed electrons) and gamma (hi freq/energy
photons) - alpha particles play a minor role here becouse they haven't (normally) enough
energy to give and can be stopped by very thin layers of metal - this is the case.
X-rays can easy be detected by photographic process too. Just remember that low energy X-rays
can be deflected easy by metal shields much better than gamma-rays that are not and can pass
through. This behaviour is related to frequency --> higher frequency = higher energy = higher
penetration as Max Plank discovered , E=hf, where E is energy of radiation quanta, h Plank's
constant, and f frequency of radiation.
So focus on beta and gamma:
1. Beta, where present, can produce X-rays by "hitting" metallic plates (what a coincidence,
again!) e.g. tungsten (and many other kind of metals) at specific angles.
So, this is what really happens in old vacuum x-rays tubes, using an hi electric field to
accelerate electrons and simulate beta-emission by electrons flowing in.
And what really happens when hi energy electrons hit the plates and light "phospores"
(e.g. Zinc Sulphide) of very old CRT tube (another coincidence ???) --> X-ray emission here.
2. Gamma-rays act completely different: they can pass through also big thickness metal blocks,
instead of beta and alpha, and they can also generate x-rays as secondary radiations. So, if
gamma-rays only are involved (Fig.5) most of them pass through the aluminium strip and emulsion
and plate and don't produce any visible reaction (black on plate - flat response) or when "hits"
happen energy loss produce x-ray emission that in the inner part of the Aluminium strip are
shielded and can't reach the photo-graphic emulsion, bounching back, that is: a flat response
in both cases.
But on the bare and sharp edges ???
Well, most gamma-rays continue passing through all the things there, but when hits happen x-ray
generated as secondary radiation can reach the emulsion, most of, outer of the aluminium strip,
then be adsorbed (hi probable) and revealing a reaction ---> white strips
So, also with ONLY gamma-rays the phenomenon could be explained.
Anyway, first and second hypothesis could verify both at the same time, if not only gamma are
involved (e.g. not only Rn gas / gamma emitter present). And also strong beta emission ONLY could
generate similar results.
As I said, this stuff serves nothing, but can demistify strange asserts on water emission of energy.
Best regards,
Max
Delbert grady
02-06-2007, 04:24 PM
Those pear shaped red blobs at the end of the Aluminium strips are probably caused by Dicky Spy's
Those pear shaped red blobs at the end of the Aluminium strips are probably caused by Dicky Spy's
Hi Delbert,
Yes, maybe. But I like other kind of pears out there! :lol:
Best regards,
Max
Qiaozhi
02-06-2007, 07:00 PM
It seems that sceptics are obviously disadvantaged by having active frontal lobes and you appear to be asking us to disable these so that we can reason as you do!
Still puzzled but soon to be lobotomised,
Rob.
Brilliant! :lol:
Also a great example of an oxymoron: "...you appear to be asking us to disable these so that we can reason as you do!"
How can you reason when you've had a lobotomy? That's the dichotomy.
"If you wish to know the mind of a man, listen to his words."
Carl-NC
02-07-2007, 03:31 AM
Perhaps it's time to add a stupefied drooling smilie... :drool:
Dell,
"Actually Robby, my products were permitted to advertise in Australia". Past tense?
Nobody is allowed to advertise these products here. There was a guy in Victoria and one in NSW (Ranger) advertising these things on EBAY recently but I reckon this will be stopped. It's becoming a bit hard to police though.
You can buy a "lucky rabbit's foot" key chain, crystals to put under you pillow and an open circuit L/R thingy hooked to a chain with an insulated link and a metal frame pyramid to sit under though! No Oz MD retailer stocks or advertises any LRL type devices at all.
Individuals here have found literally thousands of nuggets with a MD. The LRL type devices I've seen have found none and in one area that has since produced enough nuggets to make anyone happy including at least one 80 ounce nugget at 12" that MDs before the SD2000 couldn't hear because of ground noise. The LRL guy walked over and around the 80-ounce nugget and all the others for two days.
This begs the question, if a MD is required to verify the presence of a nugget after your thingy beeps then would you be still willing to put a hole down in our rock hard ground (and where?) if the MD couldn't hear a signal?
"One small mining company would send me photos of Gem stones they were recovering located with a Frequency Discriminator. Another customer visiting Australia sent me a photo of a 14 oz gold nugget he found."
Really? "Frequency Discriminator"?? And past tense? A one-off in an area where one would expect such a find and was a metal detector involved in the nugget's recovery? Was this claim verified? Do you have any idea of how quickly this news would travel thru the goldfields? You would never keep up with demand if this was true.
Esteban,
"Ask the same question to Mr. Fisher, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Etc.: why they don't became rich searching for jar full of coins?"
At least Mr Fisher (and others) have been actively involved in well documented recovery of treasure and it is clear that their MD designs work and actually show the presence of a target and indicate where to dig. None of this... "I got a beep that shows conclusively that there is treasure at 100 feet somewhere under a mountain or somewhere in a cave" and walk off claiming this is proof.
"Are they trying another systems? In 20 years, no great advances in classical MD they achieve, maybe in design, in target shower, in "hot" search head, in bla, bla, etc. You can reduce each day the noise in op amps, but the next 20 years you can't achieve significative advances in depth."
At least we can clearly show why it is so hard to improve on present designs.
"Imagine this: today you buy a "new detector", "very modern", manufactured by famous brand, but you comprobe that your old detector of "X" brand is better that you new purchases. So, are the manufacturer to defraud you? Why the manufacturer don't search in another way?"
At least they can be shown to actually work and don't rely on Karma or humidity or whether you poke your tongue out to the left or right!!! By the way, if you pick the middle of winter for your visa then you will be assured of bone-dry air in most of our richer goldfields so humidity won't bother you at all.
Dell,
We aren't asking for much. We buy a car and it gets us from A to B. We are just asking for similar, reasonable proof that these LRL devices work.
It's very simple (or should be). If I sent one back to you because I thought it was faulty then how would you test it? Tell us so we can conduct the same real and meaningfull tests for ourselves. Just give us what you would expect from the manufacturer of any other device.
Your claims and arguments just don't make any sense to anyone in the real world. We can't use conventional wisdom, proven science or anything that could be remotely mistaken for logic when debating this subject as you find this totally unacceptable. It seems that sceptics are obviously disadvantaged by having active frontal lobes and you appear to be asking us to disable these so that we can reason as you do!
Still puzzled but soon to be lobotomised,
Rob.
Hi Robby,
Wow
"Still puzzled but soon to be lobotomised" I think it would be a solution for the
"desperate TH"...the one having such an lrl "device" that walk around for days discovering
nothing, I mean.
Well, he could continue mechanically to walk around with that pistol in his hand
...after lobotomy, being also smily, but it's another story.
I think that a promising anomaly detector can't be only an electrometer, but something like
the OKMs with other stuff inside. Just, don't know how to mix say information from a mag, an
electrometer, an ULF detector and a standard metal detector etc to have practical results.
I think that first signal considered is from mag, then md and then others, but not sure.
I think also that the software inside the box consider "weights" on these signals , giving
major "weight" to what's more reliable like mag and md signals. Think also here some linear
problem approach is involved - like loading a space shuttle - to "optimize" visual
indication. When the optimum threashold is reached a target indication appears, meaning that
(I think) at least 2 signals match on a supposed target.
But what about induced anomalies ? TX stage ?
Seems that OKMs hasn't enough power inside to make such "anomalies" happen. So, it's another
, unless one consider the md the transmitter part , usefulness receiver ???
How can it discriminate stuff ??? With VLF ??? At meters underground ???
Because they claim it can...uhm they claim also there is a GPR ! (hey!)
I'm puzzled too. But my wallet is happy because I don't want to buy one.
Prefer staying happy without such a "lrl", full of stuff wallet and my entire frontal lobes.
Maybe I'll do not enrich this way, with my TH hobby, but for sure, I'll do not enrich some
exotic plumbers. That's what I say. :lol:
Best regards,
Max
Perhaps it's time to add a stupefied drooling smilie... :drool:
Hi Carl,
I found it on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drooling
"
Drooling (also known as ptyalism) is when saliva (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saliva) flows outside the mouth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouth). Drooling is generally caused by excess production of saliva, inability to retain saliva within the mouth, or problems with swallowing.
Some people with drooling problems are at increased risk of inhaling saliva, food, or fluids into the lungs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lungs). However, this is unlikely to cause harm, unless the body's normal reflex mechanisms (such as gagging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gag_reflex) and coughing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cough)) are also impaired."
What's happened ??? :shocked:
Does any LRL makes this kind of effects also ???
Best regards,
Max
Hi all,
I think I need to experiment with some so called long range locator...BUT...
don't want to spend thousands of dollars for some PVC pipes and few transistor...
plus some strange do nothing component...
Because I'm skeptic, but want to test some real circuit before convincing myself that all this stuff is completely fake.
So
Does anyone know a good schematic of an LRL ?
I mean the most interesting one in electronic terms...not relais or something
connected to a single battery lead...but a "seriuos" (well it's hard I know)
electronic circuit. Something that seems do something, not just draining the
battery...something "special" (hey!) but please not with CA3130 or similar stuff...or zinc sulphide...or ir leds...or poor man ion chamber...
can't digest anymore.:barf:
Something simple anyway, don't
have much time to experiment at now.:barf: :barf: :barf:
Which is the best schematic of that stuff out there ??? A zahori-like ?
An ULF or ELF detector ?
Some strange psicoactive device ???:eek:
Any suggestion welcome.
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-07-2007, 08:11 PM
Just this not use IR leds (modulated, range for a coin, near 25 m if the IR is lenses incorporated), no 3130, nothing, no spend much battery, but the motor actuates on your muscles and help you for to find the metal!
And if you vomit all the time, can to tread it!:lol:
Qiaozhi
02-07-2007, 08:19 PM
Hi all,
I think I need to experiment with some so called long range locator...BUT...
don't want to spend thousands of dollars for some PVC pipes and few transistor...
plus some strange do nothing component...
Because I'm skeptic, but want to test some real circuit before convincing myself that all this stuff is completely fake.
So
Does anyone know a good schematic of an LRL ?
I mean the most interesting one in electronic terms...not relais or something
connected to a single battery lead...but a "seriuos" (well it's hard I know)
electronic circuit. Something that seems do something, not just draining the
battery...something "special" (hey!) but please not with CA3130 or similar stuff...or zinc sulphide...or ir leds...or poor man ion chamber...
can't digest anymore.:barf:
Something simple anyway, don't
have much time to experiment at now.:barf: :barf: :barf:
Which is the best schematic of that stuff out there ??? A zahori-like ?
An ULF or ELF detector ?
Some strange psicoactive device ???:eek:
Any suggestion welcome.
Best regards,
Max
Have a look at the link provided by Sean in the Coils Forum (Mobius Coil).
You might want to build the quadrafilar coil with 45 degree helical twist. There's also some verbage about the OFP 111.2 Orgone Field Pulser (version three - no less) :frown: Inside this device there's an Aether Vortex chamber that looks quite similar to the ion chamber in the Mineoro FG80. Maybe you could connect this AV chamber to the Mobius coil, add a touch of amplification and viola, you might possibly (if the wind's in the right direction, the humidity is not too low, and there's a 'R' in the month) detect some of that Continually Replenished Alternating Potential (C.R.A.P.) that's emitted by longtime buried gold. :drool:
Happy LRLing... :rolleyes:
Have a look at the link provided by Sean in the Coils Forum (Mobius Coil).
You might want to build the quadrafilar coil with 45 degree helical twist. There's also some verbage about the OFP 111.2 Orgone Field Pulser (version three - no less) :frown: Inside this device there's an Aether Vortex chamber that looks quite similar to the ion chamber in the Mineoro FG80. Maybe you could connect this AV chamber to the Mobius coil, add a touch of amplification and viola, you might possibly (if the wind's in the right direction, the humidity is not too low, and there's a 'R' in the month) detect some of that Continually Replenished Alternating Potential (C.R.A.P.) that's emitted by longtime buried gold. :drool:
Happy LRLing... :rolleyes:
Good grief! Max, make sure that in the process of experimentation
that you don't accidentally catapult yourself into a different space-time
continuum. :rolleyes:
I have heard of such things happening to LRL users when they accidentally
cross the ionic field lines during an unaspicious moment.:lol:
Just this not use IR leds (modulated, range for a coin, near 25 m if the IR is lenses incorporated), no 3130, nothing, no spend much battery, but the motor actuates on your muscles and help you for to find the metal!
And if you vomit all the time, can to tread it!:lol:
Hi Esteban,
thanks for the strange apparatus there. Yeah, the termocoupling between different metals
generates these kind of small potential there. It's like a radar (hey!), I mean a rotating
antenna...not exact the same...but a strange zahori.
Because the antenna rotates , or not ?
If not, the motor spin torque acts on muscles only , as a gyro?
Seems that if only gyroscopic effect is involved here, this is a kind of enhanced
zahory-wood.
The principle is quite simple: stabilizing all the rod from external oscillations (e.g.
the ones produced by the operator steps in the field or involontary movements of small
magnitude)
I think I can experiment with my old radios antennae...maybe some dc motor from the
garbage in my garage...only thing missed is the gold mass...ehm
would use lead...have a lot...:lol:
Best regards,
Max
Hi Qiaozhi and Rudy,
"you might possibly (if the wind's in the right direction, the humidity is not too
low, and there's a 'R' in the month) detect some of that
Continually Replenished Alternating Potential (C.R.A.P.)
that's emitted by longtime buried gold. "
Yes, maybe....I think someone would call the police...if I try to exit for TH with
this kind of stuff in my hand...thinking I'm a free lobotomized too !:drool:
"Max, make sure that in the process of experimentation
that you don't accidentally catapult yourself into a different space-time
continuum.
I have heard of such things happening to LRL users when they accidentally
cross the ionic field lines during an unaspicious moment."
Uhm, seems probable...like in the Philadelphya experiment...wow...
maybe I'll encounter Elvis on the way.
Don't know why even a simple zahori project...cause me
this...stomach stimulus...
:barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:
Finally, I've realized that I can't lrling because the steady position required in LRL is not
possible to obtain vomiting all the time.:nono:
Best regards,
Max
Qiaozhi
02-08-2007, 11:43 PM
I think I can experiment with my old radios antennae...maybe some dc motor from the
garbage in my garage...only thing missed is the gold mass...ehm
would use lead...have a lot...:lol:
Best regards,
Max
Missing the gold mass?? :shocked: No problem. Just fire up the olde LRL and in a matter of minutes you'll have more olde gold than you've ever imagined. :lol:
Missing the gold mass?? :shocked: No problem. Just fire up the olde LRL and in a matter of minutes you'll have more olde gold than you've ever imagined. :lol:
Hi Qiaozhi,
yes, but I haven't one ...so i have to fuse something bracelet...ring...etc
I mean...when I'll become completely crazy. :drool:
Best regards,
Max
Qiaozhi
02-09-2007, 11:59 AM
Hi Qiaozhi,
yes, but I haven't one ...so i have to fuse something bracelet...ring...etc
I mean...when I'll become completely crazy. :drool:
Best regards,
Max
Ahh! :frown:
You have a Catch 22 situation. What to do? :shrug:
Ahh! :frown:
You have a Catch 22 situation. What to do? :shrug:
Hi Qiaozhi,
what's "catch 22" ???
Do you mean a logic paradox ?
Well, noooo :drool:
I think there are too strange things on LRL (when someone finds stuff , yeah! or why someone buy one of these electronic miracles...) to me to create such a paradox.
I think I must leave my gold items as I have at now...instead of making a gold mass...ehm...for the "device".
I've just said that I'll do that when (mean if) I'll become completely crazy.
LRL is only disturbing me...with a lot of :barf:
Best regards,
Max
Qiaozhi
02-09-2007, 10:15 PM
[quote=Max;50142]what's "catch 22" ???/quote]
Catch-22 is a novel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel) by the American author Joseph Heller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Heller).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22
In general use it refers to a situation with self-contradictory circular logic.
[quote=Max;50142]what's "catch 22" ???/quote]
Catch-22 is a novel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel) by the American author Joseph Heller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Heller).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22
In general use it refers to a situation with self-contradictory circular logic.
Hi Qiaozhi,
I've heard something about at hi-school but never read it and just don't remember at now who is Heller and his work. I'll take a look if I'll find on local bookstores. Seems interesting.
Best regards,
Max
Cossaro
02-12-2007, 07:56 AM
think you (and some other) spend too much time over this ionic-tamagoci. (2 rows are enough... if you have no doubts) Best Regards.
think you (and some other) spend too much time over this ionic-tamagoci. (2 rows are enough... if you have no doubts) Best Regards.
Hi Cossaro,
well yes.
Let's explain why.
I have dubts on the topic because I know that is possible to reveal ionic particles e.g. metal particles (ions) in sea water, and with resolution of 1 atom m^3 and also more.
Well, not by a THunter, anyway not,but by in-line underwater military analyzers - and ions are always in solution there (in sea water and not only).
It's done by chemical/fluorescence reactions but won't explain more of this.
I think that in air the story is completely different, anyway.
But in future remote analyzers could become very cheapy. Belive me.
At the moment we have to deal with these happy plumbers works - fake ion chambers or fake GPRs or other fake stuff - but the principle of ionic detection could reveal something interesting news in next years.
Just airborn ion detection remains a "Ball Sheet" - means nothing practical - because there are no ions... or if there are...wind and other issues become a huge problem.
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-12-2007, 07:48 PM
Yes, you're right. Also you can detect metals at certain medium distance with coil (oscillator), no doubdt.
Yes, you're right. Also you can detect metals at certain medium distance with coil (oscillator), no doubdt.
Hi Esteban,
I was talking about other stuff. I mean, ionic detection in solution not in air.
This method is already fully tested and doesn't need any coil. Anyway, I don't think it'll be useful in TH.
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-13-2007, 05:05 PM
I think that in air the story is completely different, anyway.
But in future remote analyzers could become very cheapy. Belive me.
Hi Esteban,
I was talking about other stuff. I mean, ionic detection in solution not in air.
This method is already fully tested and doesn't need any coil. Anyway, I don't think it'll be useful in TH.
Best regards,
Max
But no through the air the remote analyzers?
I think that in air the story is completely different, anyway.
But in future remote analyzers could become very cheapy. Belive me.
Hi Esteban,
I was talking about other stuff. I mean, ionic detection in solution not in air.
This method is already fully tested and doesn't need any coil. Anyway, I don't think it'll be useful in TH.
Best regards,
Max
But no through the air the remote analyzers?
Hi Esteban,
no I mean not in the air. I mean remote analyzers for soil and solutions (water). These kind of devices will become easy to find, cheapy and mainly intended as revealers for dangerous metal pollutions in water (e.g. near chemical industries, e.g. cadmium or mercury) or in soil - not in air.
There are researches for in-air flow ionic detection but don't know if any portable machine is on the way at now - like the above that (seems) will be soon on the market of "environment control" devices.
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-13-2007, 07:38 PM
http://serac.jrc.it/nose/minutes/pdf/eng.pdf?PHPSESSID=fedb5a7afc381191afff33f6cb0bca7c %20-
http://serac.jrc.it/nose/minutes/pdf/eng.pdf?PHPSESSID=fedb5a7afc381191afff33f6cb0bca7c %20-
Hi Esteban,
link above doesn't work for me but I know they have some research activities on the topic... I've talked about ionic and metals in specific, so
take a look at this to have an idea of what specific I mean:
http://magazine.byu.edu/?act=view&a=785
Best regards,
Max
Esteban
02-14-2007, 06:27 PM
http://serac.jrc.it/nose/minutes/pdf/eng.pdf?PHPSESSID=fedb5a7afc381191afff33f6cb0bca7c %20
Also, here the address in .txt document
Esteban,
The link is for sniffing out chemical compounds that have volatile molecules (explosives, etc.). Not clear this applies to gold or other precious metals.
Hi all,
there are some REAL (poor-man's) ion chambers...if someone want to build one...cost = nothing
http://www.techlib.com/science/ion.html
Well...not intended to find gold or anything ...but in case of some strange stuff falls in your garden...could be useful...at least to know you have to run!
Best regards,
Max
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.