pointronic 98

[aft_72005]

Hi to all
Me and Geo need pointronic 98 circuit diagram .
Can anybody upload here ?
Best regards .

[Max]

Hi,
why don't ask Esteban ? :lol:

seems he has it !


Originally Posted by Esteban http://www.thunting.com/geotech/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thunting.com/geotech/forums/showthread.php?p=44634#post44634)
Also have schematics of Mineoro (number 493 of my list):

493. Various Mineoro schematics, two boxes, etc.:
- 08 MI - Two boxes
- 89 MC - Two boxes
- BL 692 - Two boxes
- 8 VLl - MD
- 8 VLU - MD
- Modifications in Mineoro’s 8VLU
- CM 80
- D1 and D2 - BFO
- MP 10 - Two boxes
- DC 2006 - Pistol long range
- Pointronic 98 - Pistol long range
- DCH 85 - Pistol long range

If I'm right he'll refuse to post the entire schematic attempting some phrase like:
"sorry but I cannot post here"

Then you'll ask him for sending by email, but you'll never receive it. :lol:

They claimed some of these work... do you remember...?

Again this is just a stupid poker play, they'll never give you the schematic of a "branded" LRL, of their realm, cause they'll lose any (residual?) credit !

They are good ONLY BLUFFING ! :razz:

Kind regards,
Max

[Esteban]

Again this is just a stupid poker play, they'll never give you the schematic of a "branded" LRL, of their realm, cause they'll lose any (residual?) credit !

All us can wind a round of poker without showing all the cards. Credit? Who qualify here if I or another person have or not credit? Where is the measurement scale of credit? :lol:

[Geo]

Hi Max:) .

I did not ask the schematic from Esteban and neither I will ask him for it. Simply I saw published the schematic here with bad analysis and I said him to sent it to me in order to studied a little. Generally a lot of trouble for nothing:lol: .
My best regards to all of you:)

[J_Player]

All us can wind a round of poker without showing all the cards. Credit? Who qualify here if I or another person have or not credit? Where is the measurement scale of credit? :lol:The measurement scale in the LRL forum is credibility. This means if you can supply some facts that people believe, then you will have credibility. Most people will know the difference from facts and stories told with no proof.

For a long time we heard people talking that there is no ions in the ground from gold. I showed proof, and now I don't hear anybody talking stories of no gold ions any longer. This is a demonstration of how the power of facts is stronger than BS.

For people who have LRL that works to find treasure, there is no reason to show these LRL in this forum. For people who have a working LRL, you are smart to never tell your story, because it is better to use your LRL for recovering treasure, not to give to people who laugh at you.

Nobody has proved that any LRL pistol can find gold in this forum. Also nobody has proved that any LRL pistol cannot find gold in this forum. So the answer is nobody proved nothing about what LRLs can find.

The only fact we know about LRL is nobody on earth will make a demonstration in front of live witnesses to show what the LRL can find. Because of this fact, I do not spend my money to buy any LRL. I only look for facts that can be proved about LRLs.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

For a long time we heard people talking that there is no ions in the ground from gold. I showed proof, and now I don't hear anybody talking stories of no gold ions any longer. This is a demonstration of how the power of facts is stronger than BS
I think you took this statement somewhat literally. ;)
Of course gold ions do exist. They are basically gold atoms with either an excess or a deficit of electrons. What was in doubt was this sort of nonsense -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EJI5cvAKug where a Mineoro LRL is "demonstrated" finding a single coin from an unbelievable distance.
The information you have uncovered regarding gold ions in the soil relates to gold mining, and the ability of certain microbes in specific conditions to excrete traces of gold in an ionic state. This is a far cry from the YouTube video claims. I still stand by my previous conviction that you can bury a gold coin for a million years and still not be able to detect any gold ions.

[J_Player]

I think you took this statement somewhat literally. ;)
Of course gold ions do exist. They are basically gold atoms with either an excess or a deficit of electrons. What was in doubt was this sort of nonsense -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EJI5cvAKug where a Mineoro LRL is "demonstrated" finding a single coin from an unbelievable distance.
The information you have uncovered regarding gold ions in the soil relates to gold mining, and the ability of certain microbes in specific conditions to excrete traces of gold in an ionic state. This is a far cry from the YouTube video claims. I still stand by my previous conviction that you can bury a gold coin for a million years and still not be able to detect any gold ions.It is literally correct that a vertical column of trace amount of gold ions exists beginning from the location of long time buried gold and continuing to the surface of the soil, just as Mineoro says. Mineoro's claim that trace amounts of gold ions will migrate from long time buried gold to the surface through the soil is confirmed as true by researchers who measured the gold ions following this pattern. What is not correct is these same gold ions continue up 7.2 feet into the air. Researchers have discovered these gold ions become bound with neighboring chemicals in the soil when they reach surface, and do not move into the air.

Also, Mineoro has never demonstrated their locators finding any gold in front of witnesses except in the yard behind their factory. Maybe it is a good idea to see a demonstration of Mineoro FG model detectors finding fresh gold in front of live witnesses today in some location different than the back yard of Mineoro factory.

The final fact is that nobody on earth will demonstrate any LRL locating treasure in front of witnesses. It does not matter what is the science of ions or electrostatic fields. What matters is what tools you can use to locate treasures. And today, there is nobody on earth who will demonstrate any LRL finding treasure in front of you from a long distance.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi,
for me the "long time buried" something is just another goodnight story. That way they could continue forever claiming that their stuff find "long time buried gold"... that must be "long time buried...". BS.

Gold ions generation depends on many factors but no need of any long time...

I mean if you have right components in soil... maybe is matter of hours or days. They talk about 100 or 1000years. :lol:

Also bacteria if present could make exchange reactions at cellular barrier even in few minutes.

Problem is that even after a million years concentration of "free" ions is about the same cause of recollapsing e.g. of part of the ions in gold microparticles, with no electrical unbalance.

The process could take millions years for moving e.g. few grams of gold from e.g. a vein to another place... kind of dinamic equilibrium... with just few part per billions gold ions involved at any second.

No LRL could detect by ions (supposed that it can detect gold ions from soil...) "fresh" or "old time buried" gold just cause that gold ions are ever too few to be detected by an handheld detector (at least for now).

Only things that could do the job is e.g. a modified prothein or other organic compound that could "selectively" bind gold ions, then be used to trace ions trapping by e.g. luminescence to UV and the like.

Not for sure any ONLY-ELECTRONIC DEVICE TODAY.

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi Max:) .

I did not ask the schematic from Esteban and neither I will ask him for it. Simply I saw published the schematic here with bad analysis and I said him to sent it to me in order to studied a little. Generally a lot of trouble for nothing:lol: .
My best regards to all of you:)


Hi Geo,
I know your intentions are just educational ! ;)

That you'll like see with your eyes the circuit and then evaluate if could work or not, maybe build it and test!

I think that people that post here stuff with low resolution or masking parts etc don't want really post anything good or giving any good info.

I think they need that stuff to make people think they know "secrets" about LRL working... that they don't want / can't make public domain.

Like in the poker play the bluffing could be productive if at the end people think that secrets exist and they know that secrets for real. They'll push this or that brand of LRL, without giving any proof or fact and can't be linked to the business cause they claim no-connection with those manifacturers.

I think that the "Pointronic 98" case here is just another example of this strategy. As you can see nobody answer with the full schematic... but just to make other claims and assumptions.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Gold ions generation depends on many factors but no need of any long time...

I mean if you have right components in soil... maybe is matter of hours or days. They talk about 100 or 1000years. :lol:

Also bacteria if present could make exchange reactions at cellular barrier even in few minutes.In natural soil conditions, buried gold will not produce an ion anomaly in a matter of hours or days. Researchers discovered the necessary soil chemistry must first be present, and then there is a period of time to slowly dissolve the gold, and for traces of gold ions to migrate in a column to the surface. Given the best natural soil conditions where there is an existing colony of gold-eating microbes, the time required for this column of ions to reach the surface would depend on the depth of the buried gold, and the ion mobility properties of the soil surrounding the gold.

In order to dissolve gold in a matter of hours, we would need to use artificial means, such as methods used in mining recovery. One common method of mining recovery uses cyanide solution sprinkled over the material that was dug from the mine in order to dissolve and leach out any gold. This cyanide solution is collected after it drains from the soil, then the gold is chemically precipitated as solid gold metal, as well as other trace metals of interest. These cyanide recoveries are performed at gold mines all over the world, and could be a good test bed for a LRL that is claimed will find gold ions.

If a LRL is guaranteed to respond to the presence of gold ions, then there is an abundance of gold ions in the soil wherever a mine is conducting cyanide leaching. These mines often have sprinklers set up on several acres of land to spray cyanide solution on mounds of soil and dissolve tiny particles of gold. If a LRL can actually find gold ions in the soil, then these cyanide leaching fields contain gold ions thousands of times more concentrated than what is naturally found in the soil.

Do you suppose these gold ion detecting LRLs can detect where the leaching fields of a gold mine are located?

Another method where you can make your own test of these LRLs is to prepare some aqua regia to dissolve gold and create gold ions. If you dissolve 1 mg of gold into aqua regia, then add distilled water to the aqua regia to make up 1 liter, you will have a concentration of gold ions of 1 part per million. This is about 1000 times more concentrated than gold ions found in the soil from long-time buried gold. You could pour this solution into a small plastic bucket of soil and place this bucket into a hole in the ground so the top of the soil was flush with the surrounding ground. Then try your long range gold locator and see if it can locate the strong gold solution.

Whether you use cyanide solution or aqua regia solution, you can create the target conditions to test any LRL that has claims to locate dissolved gold ions. Maybe a small bottle of this dissolved gold solution would be handy to take to the local LRL shop to see if the LRL can find the hidden bottle of gold ions. If you hid a bottle of 1 part per million gold solution in the LRL shop, then asked to see the LRL work, you would quickly find out if it can locate dissolved gold ions.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

In natural soil conditions, buried gold will not produce an ion anomaly in a matter of hours or days. Researchers discovered the necessary soil chemistry must first be present, and then there is a period of time to slowly dissolve the gold, and for traces of gold ions to migrate in a column to the surface. Given the best natural soil conditions where there is an existing colony of gold-eating microbes, the time required for this column of ions to reach the surface would depend on the depth of the buried gold, and the ion mobility properties of the soil surrounding the gold.

In order to dissolve gold in a matter of hours, we would need to use artificial means, such as methods used in mining recovery. One common method of mining recovery uses cyanide solution sprinkled over the material that was dug from the mine in order to dissolve and leach out any gold. This cyanide solution is collected after it drains from the soil, then the gold is chemically precipitated as solid gold metal, as well as other trace metals of interest. These cyanide recoveries are performed at gold mines all over the world, and could be a good test bed for a LRL that is claimed will find gold ions.

If a LRL is guaranteed to respond to the presence of gold ions, then there is an abundance of gold ions in the soil wherever a mine is conducting cyanide leaching. These mines often have sprinklers set up on several acres of land to spray cyanide solution on mounds of soil and dissolve tiny particles of gold. If a LRL can actually find gold ions in the soil, then these cyanide leaching fields contain gold ions thousands of times more concentrated than what is naturally found in the soil.

Do you suppose these gold ion detecting LRLs can detect where the leaching fields of a gold mine are located?

Another method where you can make your own test of these LRLs is to prepare some aqua regia to dissolve gold and create gold ions. If you dissolve 1 mg of gold into aqua regia, then add distilled water to the aqua regia to make up 1 liter, you will have a concentration of gold ions of 1 part per million. This is about 1000 times more concentrated than gold ions found in the soil from long-time buried gold. You could pour this solution into a small plastic bucket of soil and place this bucket into a hole in the ground so the top of the soil was flush with the surrounding ground. Then try your long range gold locator and see if it can locate the strong gold solution.

Whether you use cyanide solution or aqua regia solution, you can create the target conditions to test any LRL that has claims to locate dissolved gold ions. Maybe a small bottle of this dissolved gold solution would be handy to take to the local LRL shop to see if the LRL can find the hidden bottle of gold ions. If you hid a bottle of 1 part per million gold solution in the LRL shop, then asked to see the LRL work, you would quickly find out if it can locate dissolved gold ions.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
thanks for the recipes... but I still think that's a matter of hours and days if right conditions are present in the soil.

You'll get the same amount of ions of the so called "long time buried gold" conditions... parts per billion. For me is so.

Cannot see any good reason why e.g. gold ions have to concentrate or increase in number with long time last.
So be directly proportional to time actually past.
For me is a bad argumentation till someone explain why that ions haven't return to non-ionized state due e.g. reduction reactions.

If so you'll find enormous amount of gold ions in very ancient deposits of natural gold and it isn't so.
Think at e.g. million years old deposits.
Even parts per billion. :rolleyes:

For me the dinamic equilibrium depends of factors like:
- amount of gold present
- amount of chemicals/bacteria in soil
etc
but not by time... after 1 month or 1 million years you'll have about the same amount of free gold ions in the soil.

After a short time, like in closed systems phase change you'll got a situation so that you'll have so many new gold ions equal to the number of recollapsed in non-ionized state atoms of gold.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,but I still think that's a matter of hours and days if right conditions are present in the soil.You are wrong. Check the millions of pages of research and see what the scientists who studied gold ions in the ground discovered. The only way to create "right conditions" for short time ions in the soil is to artificially introduce gold-dissolving chemicals in greater concentrations than could be normally found in nature. The chemicals necessary are sodium cyanide, potassium cyanide, and sulfur complexes. The only common natural source of these chemicals below the surface come from certain metal-eating microbes that cannot grow in a densely enough populated colony in soil to produce sufficient ions to rise several hundred meters or even several centimeters in a few days.

The fastest natural gold ion production would be caused by burying gold at a shallow depth in soil high in organic matter. This would allow a rich environment for certain gold-eating microbes to produce the necessary soil chemistry, and would allow a short migration path to the surface for the gold ions. In this condition, it takes at least several months without artificial incubation and chemical additives to produce a weak, sub-parts per billion concentration of gold ions. Experiments conducted by researchers have proved this. But you are free to believe it is not true.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,You are wrong. Check the millions of pages of research and see what the scientists who studied gold ions in the ground discovered. The only way to create "right conditions" for short time ions in the soil is to artificially introduce gold-dissolving chemicals in greater concentrations than could be normally found in nature. The chemicals necessary are sodium cyanide, potassium cyanide, and sulfur complexes. The only common natural source of these chemicals below the surface come from certain metal-eating microbes that cannot grow in a densely enough populated colony in soil to produce sufficient ions to rise several hundred meters or even several centimeters in a few days.

The fastest natural gold ion production would be caused by burying gold at a shallow depth in soil high in organic matter. This would allow a rich environment for certain gold-eating microbes to produce the necessary soil chemistry, and would allow a short migration path to the surface for the gold ions. In this condition, it takes at least several months without artificial incubation and chemical additives to produce a weak, sub-parts per billion concentration of gold ions. Experiments conducted by researchers have proved this. But you are free to believe it is not true.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
maybe I'm wrong... maybe don't take a day or a week... or a month,
or a year... but then:

Cannot see any good reason why e.g. gold ions have to concentrate or increase in number with long time last.
So be directly proportional to time actually past.
For me is a bad argumentation till someone explain why that ions haven't return to non-ionized state due e.g. reduction reactions.

By logic:
If exist a directly proportional relation to time actually past, you'll have to find not parts per billion gold ions... but in some ancient deposits, millions years old, much more!

But you'll find everytime parts per billion !

Do you say you'll find more there ?

So, at the end, changes nothing... if it takes 1 year instead of 1 month for me... I'll always say that even after 1 million years you'll find about the same that you'll find after 1 year.

For me all this talking about "long time buried gold" that produce tons of ions is just another fake argument flying around LRL... BS.
My opinion.

Long time buried or not... free ions are these ! parts per billion.

You'll need a specialized lab to determine if they are there... you cannot locate the spot... the vertical column is an optimistic point of view how how things moves down our feets.

Good for Mineoro maybe... but just to make advertise.

I think that even detecting real-time those ions in soil ...determining how much gold you'll find (few nanograms or tons ?)... or where it's located (the spot) could be impossible that way.

For me ionic detection is absolutely unusable in real TH at now.

Changes nothing, no more gold ions, no remote location: NO IONIC LRL.

Just my thoughts.

Best regards,
Max

[Esteban]

For me ionic detection is absolutely unusable in real TH at now.

Changes nothing, no more gold ions, no remote location: NO IONIC LRL.

Just my thoughts.

Best regards,
Max

100% of certainty in any matter is just 100% of ignorance.

Esteban

[J_Player]

For me is a bad argumentation till someone explain why that ions haven't return to non-ionized state due e.g. reduction reactions.The reason you cannot understand why the buried gold ions maintain their parts per billion concentration of ions is because you are too lazy to read through the reports to find the answers. There are thousands of reports available that explain the reasons, but you prefer to use your own fake science that you make up from your logic and your ignorance rather than read what was discovered by scientists about the subterranean metal chemistry.

I posted more than a million pages of reports made by scientists and researchers who gave all the answers and more. If you actually read the data that researchers reported, you would find that small amounts of gold are dissolved by cyanide and are then carried by sulfur complexes through the soil. You will find these moving ions are not depleted from the soil, but continue to exist in amounts that can be measured in parts per billion or less. You will find there are other mechanisms that cause a trace of gold ions to continue to exist in the soil besides that mechanism.

Your logic is not logic, but only ignorance. There is no logic that proves gold ions are depleted from the soil because they return to the non-ionized state, when chemists measure these gold ions are not depleted from the soil. Hundreds of scientist's data measured wins over any theoretical logic using on wrong data to prove the gold ions become depleted.

Apparently, you did not read any of the reports that show what happens when these microbes are introduced into recently buried gold, or the reports of chemists who charted the path of gold ions emanating from deep gold ore. If you read these reports, you would not make ignorant statements. (Unless you believe there are over 2 million reports from researchers who all lied about what they found - then you would be correct as long as you could prove they all turned in fake data and reports).

Here are search links with over 2 million reports on how gold ions form. You will find many reports in these links that show what really happens to gold underground, and what does not happen:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gold+microbe&btnG=Google+Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gold+ion+soil+mine&btnG=Search

If you read these reports, you will have good information so you can make intelligent conclusions instead of always wrong conclusion that you want people to believe.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Esteban]

If you read these reports, you will have good information so you can make intelligent conclusions instead of always wrong conclusion that you want people to believe.

Best wishes,
J_P

Yes, so he want to darken the understanding in matter he don't know.

[Qiaozhi]

The fastest natural gold ion production would be caused by burying gold at a shallow depth in soil high in organic matter. This would allow a rich environment for certain gold-eating microbes to produce the necessary soil chemistry, and would allow a short migration path to the surface for the gold ions. In this condition, it takes at least several months without artificial incubation and chemical additives to produce a weak, sub-parts per billion concentration of gold ions. Experiments conducted by researchers have proved this. But you are free to believe it is not true.

Best wishes,
J_P
Maybe the back yard at the Mineoro factory is such a place. :???:
Or perhaps this is generally the case in Brazil?
My brief encounter with a Mineoro FG80 did not inspire me with any confidence that it was working as advertised. There was lots of random beeping with no discernible target. It is even unable to detect the gold foil that came with the device.

[Geo]

Hi Geo,
I know your intentions are just educational ! ;)

That you'll like see with your eyes the circuit and then evaluate if could work or not, maybe build it and test!

I think that people that post here stuff with low resolution or masking parts etc don't want really post anything good or giving any good info.

I think they need that stuff to make people think they know "secrets" about LRL working... that they don't want / can't make public domain.

Like in the poker play the bluffing could be productive if at the end people think that secrets exist and they know that secrets for real. They'll push this or that brand of LRL, without giving any proof or fact and can't be linked to the business cause they claim no-connection with those manifacturers.

I think that the "Pointronic 98" case here is just another example of this strategy. As you can see nobody answer with the full schematic... but just to make other claims and assumptions.

Kind regards,
Max

Hi Max:) . You know me...... Esteban knows me. I know you, Now where is the problem ????
I do not want to become indirectly advertiser:angry: of no one product or what they is Pointronic98 or DCH 85 or Mineoro or any other. This is the reason where I do not participate enough in this forum (even if I like).
Recommending it examined enough what Esteban says because i am sure something serious is hidden behind his said.
Best Regards:)

[J_Player]

Hi Qiaozhi,Maybe the back yard at the Mineoro factory is such a place. :???:I have never seen any evidence of Mineoro LRL finding treasure except in the back yard of their factory. Maybe they manufacture airborne gold ions and beam them to locations where gold is hidden in the ground. Maybe it is a better idea to take the Mineoro LRL to a different location away from the Mineoro factory for testing. We know there are no airborne gold ions, so according to the Mineoro advertising, the Pointronic as well as the FG and PDC locators would not have anything to locate. Maybe Damasio is mistaken about what his LRLs detect.

While I have read hundreds of reports by real researchers who claim they chemically measured traces of gold ions in the soil above buried gold, I have never seen any LRL demonstrated to locate these areas of ionizd soil or buried gold. The existence of ions are real science that researchers have demonstrated countless times, but no LRL manufacturer will demonstrate his equipment locating these ions. If these LRLs work so good to locate ion anomalies in the soil. I have to wonder why gold mines pay over $60,000 USD to have MMI chemical surveys done instead of buying a $5000 LRL. :shrug:

Here is another test for LRLs to find soil that is known to have gold ions measured in the parts per billion:
Take the LRL to a gold mine that has recently had a MMI survey done to locate the gold ion anomalies at the ground surface. Make a survey to locate any gold ion anomalies with the LRL, then wait for the chemist's results of the MMI survey. You will then see if the LRL located any of the locations where the soil tests showed an anomaly. This is a sure-fire test, because you are not testing for target samples made up. It is real world conditions, with naturally formed gold ions at the surface. Can the technology of a brass welding rod compete with the chemist's laboratory?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Maybe Damasio is mistaken about what his LRLs detect.
I doubt this very much. As Carl has said previously, they are very good at wallet mining. So I don't think there is any mistake, and their devices are working as designed. :D

[Max]

Hi,
I'm tired of all this fake stuff.

No commercial LRL work. This is a fact.

Nobody can give any proof that they work. This is a fact.

No tons of gold ions exist in anywhere, just part per billion. This is a fact.

No just-electronic handheld device could detect that ions. This is a fact.

My above argumentation are all facts. Science.

Find a book and read if you don't belive my words.

For JP:
Have no time to read tons of documents about how microbes could give you the map of treasure... for me this is an impossible application to TH, like aura-kirlian is... or medium... or magic ravens.
This is my opinion.

For Esteban: well ignorance, you talk about "electric field" where there isn't but there are currents...
You mix electrostatic with currents... you say that a long-time buried something gold alter the Earth magnetic field in a detectable way... your assertions say everything about your understanding and knowledge of science/physics.

Is not me that have to say you don't know what you're talking about... but just you are enough.

Then also, you haven't answered my question on the zinc-carbon battery. Why ?


Best regards,
Max

[Max]

I doubt this very much. As Carl has said previously, they are very good at wallet mining. So I don't think there is any mistake, and their devices are working as designed. :D

Totally agree for the reasons of above.

[J_Player]

Hi Max,
Have no time to read tons of documents about how microbes could give you the map of treasure... for me this is an impossible application to TH, like aura-kirlian is... or medium... or magic ravens.You are correct. Long range locating will remain impossible for you. The price of making a long range locating application is knowledge. If you have no time to learn the physics of buried metals, then you will never have sufficient knowledge to make any workable long range application.

I doubt anyone who has taken the trouble to learn the physics and spend the time experimenting would tell you what they learned, considering you don't have time or desire to learn, and prefer to form conclusions from ignorance.

But then, life is happy when your head is not full of facts to consider. Things are much simpler when the only agenda is to point an accusing finger at anyone who has ideas that treasure could be found electronically from a distance. Better not to worry about troublesome details like ions in the ground, and chemists locating buried gold.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,
You are correct. Long range locating will remain impossible for you. The price of making a long range locating application is knowledge. If you have no time to learn the physics of buried metals, then you will never have sufficient knowledge to make any workable long range application.

I doubt anyone who has taken the trouble to learn the physics and spend the time experimenting would tell you what they learned, considering you don't have time or desire to learn, and prefer to form conclusions from ignorance.

But then, life is happy when your head is not full of facts to consider. Things are much simpler when the only agenda is to point an accusing finger at anyone who has ideas that treasure could be found electronically from a distance. Better not to worry about troublesome details like ions in the ground, and chemists locating buried gold.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
don't take it personal... I just have few time !
I consider that way wrong... but these are my ideas.

I've already made lot of studies so I know what I'm talking about...
I don't confuse static fields with currents... like others do... no way.
No need of opening again physics books to know that things.

Till now nobody give any proof that LRL could be made by electronics.
I think that in future maybe it could be possible...
but you know... I'm not an MD/LRL manifacturer or something like that... have few time to read stuff, few time to play with circuits etc
, so I'm here just to exchange my point of view, thoughts.
That's all.

Maybe find a suitable way to LRL is your target, I don't know...
I'll belive you if you'll find a good way to do that, with proofs, scientific facts etc and application also... devices....
but for sure LRL design is not my goal.

Kind regards,
Max

[Esteban]

Max

The problem is you're closed at all possibilities. But you need expending time and go in real field for to test. Go and see what the Nature can give you, not inexistent info in books of Physics about the matter. Hear real experiences of others like me. Maybe my theory of electric field around buried metals is wrong, but since some measurements directly on the buried metal site, I can conclude the nature of an electrical field, not only variation in soil's resistivity.

[Qiaozhi]

Max

The problem is you're closed at all possibilities. But you need expending time and go in real field for to test. Go and see what the Nature can give you, not inexistent info in books of Physics about the matter. Hear real experiences of others like me. Maybe my theory of electric field around buried metals is wrong, but since some measurements directly on the buried metal site, I can conclude the nature of an electrical field, not only variation in soil's resistivity.
Hi Esteban,

As you know I am a big skeptic where LRLs are concerned, particularly regarding this ionic detection stuff. Dowsing to me is also a waste of time and purely a combination of self-delusion and selective memory. This has been proven many times.

However, I'm quite interested in your detectors because you are following a practical route, and not trying to use this technology for wallet mining. Maybe you are onto something, maybe not, but I personally would like to know more. Is there a simple circuit (or experiment) you can share with us that shows detection of a coin (for example) at a distance beyond the reach of any standard metal detector? Maybe one of your first experiments would be a good starting point. Try to make me a believer... :)

[J_Player]

Hi esteban,
Is there a simple circuit (or experiment) you can share with us that shows detection of a coin...?This sounds like a good idea. Perhaps an older design that will locate a non-ferrous coin from 10 feet would be a good to demonstrate that the principle can work. If you post a schematic and photos with instructions how to build and tune this limited range LRL, then people would be able to demonstrate for themselves if it finds the coin or not.

If people saw it find the coins from 10 feet distance, then they would all laugh at people who say it is impossible.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Hi esteban,
This sounds like a good idea. Perhaps an older design that will locate a non-ferrous coin from 10 feet would be a good to demonstrate that the principle can work. If you post a schematic and photos with instructions how to build and tune this limited range LRL, then people would be able to demonstrate for themselves if it finds the coin or not.

If people saw it find the coins from 10 feet distance, then they would all laugh at people who say it is impossible.

Best wishes,
J_P


One feet is enought to see that the system works. 10 feet for a coin is much better than the best MD so why to give us the schematic.
In any case it does not need we to press him.Esteban will decide alone when might present to us his some schematic from lrl.
Regards:)

[Max]

Hi,
and do you think for real Esteban or all the others will give here a schematic of one of his LRL ? :lol:

To show you that this stuff don't work. :rolleyes:

Poker play. Let's see... if he'll post one of his schematics and it work I'll excuse publicly with him and accept that he's right and just-electronic-LRL is possible.

But Esteban MUST be one you claim functional one... and detect a coin from at least 2meters away on surface... not a zahori or other older circuits of dead manifacturers... no no.

I want to see one of your schematics not other things.

I'm awaiting for your answer.

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Geo,
One feet is enought to see that the system works. 10 feet for a coin is much better than the best MD so why to give us the schematic.
In any case it does not need we to press him.Esteban will decide alone when might present to us his some schematic from lrl.
Regards:)One feet is not LRL. One feet IB and TR is ordinary metal detector. We already know that IB detector can find coins from 1 feet because many IB detectors from long time ago can do this. Same is true for other TR detectors. But these designs cannot find a non ferrous coin from 10 feet. This is the reason why it is good to see construction details for a true long range detection that has not been shown before.

We do not look for secret technology to be used in patents for 100 meter locating coins. Only asking for instructions to build a limited 10 feet detector. Limited 10 feet LRL is not the same as highly developed LRL for 100 meter. !0 feet is old style LRL that will not give secrets to new 100 meter LRLs.

If we see example to build a small 10-foot distance working LRL, then we don't need to hear thousands of forum talk from people always say is not possible. When we have an example to build a small 10-foot distance LRL, it will make finally a peaceful and quiet forum with only technology, no more argument.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Geo,
One feet is not LRL. One feet IB and TR is ordinary metal detector. We already know that IB detector can find coins from 1 feet because many IB detectors from long time ago can do this. Same is true for other TR detectors. But these designs cannot find a non ferrous coin from 10 feet. This is the reason why it is good to see construction details for a true long range detection that has not been shown before.

We do not look for secret technology to be used in patents for 100 meter locating coins. Only asking for instructions to build a limited 10 feet detector. Limited 10 feet LRL is not the same as highly developed LRL for 100 meter. !0 feet is old style LRL that will not give secrets to new 100 meter LRLs.

If we see example to build a small 10-foot distance working LRL, then we don't need to hear thousands of forum talk from people always say is not possible. When we have an example to build a small 10-foot distance LRL, it will make finally a peaceful and quiet forum with only technology, no more argument.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
I want to see it too.

But I'm ok only if it's:
- capable of detecting a coin on surface soil from 2 meters away (so even less than 10 feet)
- coin could be 1inch maximum diameter, round , 0.1 inch thickness maximum, flat (as coins are)
- coin could be iron made, or gold, silver, lead, copper, nickel, aluminium or alloys of that metals ONLY
- unit and antenna must stay in the following dimensions 40cm*40cm*40cm
, like the ones he had in the pictures and stay in that limited cubic volume
- MUST BE an Esteban's design claimed by him capable of doing that so detecting that single coin from at least 2meters away

Just these points ( seems not too much ) of above and I swear I'll mantain my promise of excuse etc with him here.

MUST BE HIS DESIGN CAUSE: he claimed it's possible and that he have done already, so he must provide one of his original schematic to give the proof

So c'mon Esteban let us dream ! :rolleyes:

Let see what happens. :)

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

There already exists a method that can detect as you say in your test requirements.

- capable of detecting a coin on surface soil from 2 meters away (so even less than 10 feet)
- coin could be 1inch maximum diameter, round , 0.1 inch thickness maximum, flat (as coins are)
- coin could be iron made, or gold, silver, lead, copper, nickel, aluminium or alloys of that metals ONLY
- unit and antenna must stay in the following dimensions 40cm*40cm*40cm

I can rent a magnetometer that will find an iron coin in this condition from 2 meters. Since we are talking about LRL design that uses coils, I would look only for non-ferrous to support the idea of LRL.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,

There already exists a method that can detect as you say in your test requirements.

- capable of detecting a coin on surface soil from 2 meters away (so even less than 10 feet)
- coin could be 1inch maximum diameter, round , 0.1 inch thickness maximum, flat (as coins are)
- coin could be iron made, or gold, silver, lead, copper, nickel, aluminium or alloys of that metals ONLY
- unit and antenna must stay in the following dimensions 40cm*40cm *40cm

I can rent a magnetometer that will find an iron coin in this condition from 2 meters. Since we are talking about LRL design that uses coils, I would look only for non-ferrous to support the idea of LRL.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi,
yes you are right... it was only a little provocation.
Could be 2 meters above the coin ! :D
So we can agree the following conditions:


- capable of detecting a coin on surface soil from 2 meters away (so even less than 10 feet)
- coin could be 1inch maximum diameter, round , 0.1 inch thickness maximum, flat (as coins are)
- coin could be made of gold, silver, lead, copper, nickel, aluminium or alloys of that metals ONLY
- unit and antenna must stay in the following dimensions 40cm*40cm*40cm

No iron target.

Is it ok for you ?

But can't see any answer... of him !?
Esteban where are you ?

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi,
sorry missing one part:

- capable of detecting a coin on surface soil from 2 meters away (so even less than 10 feet)
- coin could be 1inch maximum diameter, round , 0.1 inch thickness maximum, flat (as coins are)
- coin could be made of gold, silver, lead, copper, nickel, aluminium or alloys of that metals ONLY
- unit and antenna must stay in the following dimensions 40cm*40cm*40cm
, like the ones he had in the pictures and stay in that limited cubic volume
- MUST BE an Esteban's design claimed by him capable of doing that so detecting that single coin from at least 2meters away

It's important that circuit is one of his designs.
Reasons already exposed but repeated here.

MUST BE HIS DESIGN CAUSE: he claimed it's possible and that he have done already, so he must provide one of his original schematic to give the proof.


Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

If I claim I built a detector that can locate a 1 inch dia gold coin on the moon, does this mean I must post the schematic in the forum?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,

If I claim I built a detector that can locate a 1 inch dia gold coin on the moon, does this mean I must post the schematic in the forum?

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi,
but so why have you claiming that in this forum?

He claimed his LRLs work, he have done, he designed them etc etc
nobody pushed him to say that things... he wants say that things, he wants make that claims, or not ?

We asked for a "limited" proof of what he said it's possible. Not a thing that can find coins on the Moon. 2 meters are enough to belive his LRLs work for real.

Detecting coins from 2 meters away on surface is not something of great economic value... something you would copy and make in mass production for the TH market. Is it ?
You can use your eyes to find the coin. Or not ?

So, it's still the poker play here ?
Claiming the impossible and then giving no proof of that.
He don't post anything good... just BLUFFING with funny pictures again ?

Oh yes, the SECRET. I see.
If he post a schematic we'll know the SECRET ! :lol:
Always the same stuff... same game.

I'm open minded... if he'll post a thing like in requirements I'll do what I've said.

But, as always, no answer... so why I haven't to laugh at those pictures ?
Tell me why.

Best regards,
Max

[Qiaozhi]

The trouble is that you guys are too aggressive. Now you've scared Esteban away. :frown:
Personally I'm interested to know if Esteban is onto something or not. I don't need a design handed to me on a plate, just a simple experiment would suffice.

Esteban - There are a few things I would like to know.
1. Does the device use a mono-coil arrangement as a receive coil, similar to a PI detector coil, or is it a parabolic dish like the Zahori?
2. What is the frequency band that needs to be monitored?
3. If it's a mono-coil, then why doesn't it get affected by anything behind the coil? i.e interference from the control box, for example.

If you'd rather reply to me in private then that's ok. I will keep all correspondence confidential.
Trust me, I'm an engineer. :)

[Max]

The trouble is that you guys are too aggressive. Now you've scared Esteban away. :frown:
Personally I'm interested to know if Esteban is onto something or not. I don't need a design handed to me on a plate, just a simple experiment would suffice.

Esteban - There are a few things I would like to know.
1. Does the device use a mono-coil arrangement as a receive coil, similar to a PI detector coil, or is it a parabolic dish like the Zahori?
2. What is the frequency band that needs to be monitored?
3. If it's a mono-coil, then why doesn't it get affected by anything behind the coil? i.e interference from the control box, for example.

If you'd rather reply to me in private then that's ok. I will keep all correspondence confidential.
Trust me, I'm an engineer. :)

Hi Qiaozhi,
do you say that I've scared Esteban ??? :lol:

"Personally I'm interested to know if Esteban is onto something or not. "

the typo error is funny here... cause seems you're interested in what he's into... :razz: I'm sure you aren't.

From my point of view... I'm not interested in his affairs... just of his claims here. I think that there is a connection between many people appeared here to push the LRL fantasies at the extreme, but is just my point of view.

I'm not interested in these things. He could continue support LRLs and brands has he wants... it's not my problem.

But when said that he made this and that, designed, realized LRLs discovered physics or lacks in existent theories... when he claims his LRLs work and then disappears... like Count Dracula, well I'm interested man. :lol:

"2. What is the frequency band that needs to be monitored?"

frequency 300KHz, or down to 70KHz he already said that... if you remember.

But do you think he'll send you the schematic ??? :D

"If you'd rather reply to me in private then that's ok. I will keep all correspondence confidential. "

Oh yeah... also me can keep secrets... but here we are in a public place...
if someone claim have done something already IN PUBLIC would be serious having also a PUBLIC discussion or exchange of ideas... not making secret societies between engineers and how knows what.

PUBLIC CLAIMS, PUBLIC DISCUSSION

Everyone here would like to see his design posted.

That's what I think.

Best regards,
Max

[Qiaozhi]

the typo error is funny here... cause seems you're interested in what he's into...
What typo? :???:
I actually wrote: "Personally I'm interested to know if Esteban is onto something or not."

Perhaps your grasp of English is not so good. :rolleyes:

[J_Player]

Hi Qiaozhi,

Max is not interested in learning what you want to know. He is here on a witch-hunt to fill the forum with his diatribe anytime somebody gives information that may lead to understanding LRL principles. From my point of view... I'm not interested in his affairs... just of his claims here.To better illustrate his purpose, look in his thread titled "Skeptic's Bar (No crappy, no party !)" and other posts he makes using only opinions that often are incongruous to know facts. His purpose is to prove LRLs can't work and criticize anyone who gives any information that could be used to understand something about this topic. Thus, I would not expect esteban to put any details of his discoveries in this forum while Max continues to post here.

However, I don't care what Max might try to launch against me. I have pretty much demonstrated his ignorance and refusal to read about the facts that scientists have observed. In order to give a little information about the questions you are asking without revealing any of esteban's secrets, I will need to jump ahead of my next coming lecture on the physics of buried metals. In fact, we can take another look at a previous post where I talked about the space energies that cause the electric field in the air.

Let's take a look at radio waves in the air around us. There are thousands of radio waves of all frequencies. Some of these are natural from the earth and from outside the earth. A lot of the natural radio noise is caused by movements of physical objects and friction at or near the earth's surface. This radio noise is often very weak, and it often can travel long distances. When we add the extraterrestrial radio noise, much of the natural radio signals are obscured. Then we add man-made radio signals on top of the natural sources, much of the natural radio signal spectrum is hidden in the noise. The man-made noise includes things like electrical noise from power circuitry and switching, but also large amounts of radio signals from transmitted frequencies including broadcast bands and high into the UHF band.

The place to look for your clues is the transmission patterns that these radio waves follow. Many broadcast radio stations will change their antenna patterns in the late afternoon in order to compensate for changes in the ionosphere so hopefully the radio signal will continue to reach the locations where their audience is. This is an example of how solar conditions can change the layers of the ionosphere to influence radio wave patterns.

But what about on the ground? We all have found that our mobile phones have dead spots where they get poor reception. And the same is true of the FM and AM broadcast bands. This phenomenon is not limited to line of sight transmissions. We also have seen how certain objects protruding from the ground are able to reflect radio signals and allow reception in a location that was dead before the reflecting object was placed there. This is often a nuisance when listening to music or TV as we experience "ghosting" or "mushy sounds" that come as a result of multi-path reception from reflections. Consider also the design of some of the older yagi antenna constructions, where passive reflector and director elements are placed at strategic locations in order to help capture the desired signal.

There is another phenomenon that not many people have observed very closely. Certain things under the ground can influence the reception of radio waves as strongly as things above the ground. First, let us suppose there is an area of surface ground that has a minute concentration of metal ions below it (an anomaly in the soil). These ions are becoming bound and de-ionized at the surface unlike the surrounding soil which is more neutral. In addition, there may be a column of ionized soil several centimeters or several kilometers beneath it. This column of ionized material is an anomaly, even if a very trace anomaly. Does buried metal have an influence on the telluric flow of current in the ground? Yes, according to mining exploration companies who measure telluric and magnetotelluric currents to locate geological structures and ores deep in the ground. But what does this have to do with radio waves in the air?

Some people who have spent long hours mapping the radio signal strength above geological structures discovered there are patterns where the radio signals become very strong or very weak depending on anomalies that exist under the ground. This research has always been suspect because of the huge amount of interference from the noise sources mentioned above. Thus the mapping of these subterranean anomalies is not very consistent. The best results are obtained if repeat sampling is done the same time of day after a survey is performed.

One of the subterranean anomalies that was discovered to show a radio signal anomaly at the surface is long-time buried metals. These also are difficult to locate because of the huge amount of noise and interference. The people looking for radio wave signal anomalies are not always fully aware of all the influences that will obscure the anomaly above a long time buried metal object. There are many geological formations beneath the ground that also will cause an anomaly perhaps unknown to the hunter, even when the atmospheric noise conditions are optimum. Thus, we see many failed efforts from these hunters. Among the passive radio anomaly hunting methods, some experimenters have selected from among the existing "noise signals" to track the location of their anomalies, and locate things under the ground.

For the more sophisticated treasure hunting experimenter, The idea of using an active circuit seems appealing. By transmitting a radio wave with either a coil or antenna, the transmitted signal can be controlled precisely. A small transmitter can control the frequency, signal strength, broadcast pattern, etc. to suit the existing conditions. It appears this is what esteban is doing based on the locators he described. If you don't believe there is a radio wave signal strength phenomenon that can be detected above long time buried metals, then you can abandon any further study into the matter. If esteban does not want to divulge the details of his circuitry, then it is his business to keep his circuits private.

There are a number of other researchers who have also discovered this phenomenon, using radio wave surveys as well as by measuring other physical anomalies in the air above buried targets and geological structures. When you look at all the methods mining companies use to survey their land, and make an overlay map, you will see several of the physical surveys have strong correlations, and when used together can lead to 70% or better success rate in finding the ore deposits they are looking for. Some of these same physical properties are capable of influencing the radio signal strength above the ground. In some cases, the influence is not measurable, but does this change when we add a well controlled transmitted signal?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Hi Qiaozhi,


For the more sophisticated treasure hunting experimenter, The idea of using an active circuit seems appealing. By transmitting a radio wave with either a coil or antenna, the transmitted signal can be controlled precisely. A small transmitter can control the frequency, signal strength, broadcast pattern, etc. to suit the existing conditions. It appears this is what esteban is doing based on the locators he described. If you don't believe there is a radio wave signal strength phenomenon that can be detected above long time buried metals, then you can abandon any further study into the matter. If esteban does not want to divulge the details of his circuitry, then it is his business to keep his circuits private.


Best wishes,
J_P

Hi J_P.
I think that you are very near......
Regards:)

[Qiaozhi]

It appears this is what esteban is doing based on the locators he described. If you don't believe there is a radio wave signal strength phenomenon that can be detected above long time buried metals, then you can abandon any further study into the matter. If esteban does not want to divulge the details of his circuitry, then it is his business to keep his circuits private.
Yes - that is his perogative and, although it would be good to see a circuit, I doubt this will ever happen. In that case I'm just happy with the drip feeding. :)
If the concept has merit, then it may be worth investing some time to build a prototype to test out the theory, but I'm not going to waste my time on stupid medieval ideas based on divining rods, or the even dafter idea of map dowsing. However, if a fellow experimenter claims that a sort of mid-range detection is possible, it could be worth a look. I'm not holding my breath, but who knows?

[J_Player]

but I'm not going to waste my time on stupid medieval ideas based on divining rods, or the even dafter idea of map dowsing.Hahahahahaahahaaaaa :lol: :lol: :lol:.

Perhaps a pll controlled electronic pendelum with FET powered peizo actuators and a PIC to run the diaplay and set the controls?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Max]

What typo? :???:
I actually wrote: "Personally I'm interested to know if Esteban is onto something or not."

Perhaps your grasp of English is not so good. :rolleyes:

Hi,
yes maybe. :lol:

So you are interested. Fine.

Best regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi Qiaozhi,

Max is not interested in learning what you want to know. He is here on a witch-hunt to fill the forum with his diatribe anytime somebody gives information that may lead to understanding LRL principles. To better illustrate his purpose, look in his thread titled "Skeptic's Bar (No crappy, no party !)" and other posts he makes using only opinions that often are incongruous to know facts. His purpose is to prove LRLs can't work and criticize anyone who gives any information that could be used to understand something about this topic. Thus, I would not expect esteban to put any details of his discoveries in this forum while Max continues to post here.

However, I don't care what Max might try to launch against me. I have pretty much demonstrated his ignorance and refusal to read about the facts that scientists have observed. In order to give a little information about the questions you are asking without revealing any of esteban's secrets, I will need to jump ahead of my next coming lecture on the physics of buried metals. In fact, we can take another look at a previous post where I talked about the space energies that cause the electric field in the air.

Let's take a look at radio waves in the air around us. There are thousands of radio waves of all frequencies. Some of these are natural from the earth and from outside the earth. A lot of the natural radio noise is caused by movements of physical objects and friction at or near the earth's surface. This radio noise is often very weak, and it often can travel long distances. When we add the extraterrestrial radio noise, much of the natural radio signals are obscured. Then we add man-made radio signals on top of the natural sources, much of the natural radio signal spectrum is hidden in the noise. The man-made noise includes things like electrical noise from power circuitry and switching, but also large amounts of radio signals from transmitted frequencies including broadcast bands and high into the UHF band.

The place to look for your clues is the transmission patterns that these radio waves follow. Many broadcast radio stations will change their antenna patterns in the late afternoon in order to compensate for changes in the ionosphere so hopefully the radio signal will continue to reach the locations where their audience is. This is an example of how solar conditions can change the layers of the ionosphere to influence radio wave patterns.

But what about on the ground? We all have found that our mobile phones have dead spots where they get poor reception. And the same is true of the FM and AM broadcast bands. This phenomenon is not limited to line of sight transmissions. We also have seen how certain objects protruding from the ground are able to reflect radio signals and allow reception in a location that was dead before the reflecting object was placed there. This is often a nuisance when listening to music or TV as we experience "ghosting" or "mushy sounds" that come as a result of multi-path reception from reflections. Consider also the design of some of the older yagi antenna constructions, where passive reflector and director elements are placed at strategic locations in order to help capture the desired signal.

There is another phenomenon that not many people have observed very closely. Certain things under the ground can influence the reception of radio waves as strongly as things above the ground. First, let us suppose there is an area of surface ground that has a minute concentration of metal ions below it (an anomaly in the soil). These ions are becoming bound and de-ionized at the surface unlike the surrounding soil which is more neutral. In addition, there may be a column of ionized soil several centimeters or several kilometers beneath it. This column of ionized material is an anomaly, even if a very trace anomaly. Does buried metal have an influence on the telluric flow of current in the ground? Yes, according to mining exploration companies who measure telluric and magnetotelluric currents to locate geological structures and ores deep in the ground. But what does this have to do with radio waves in the air?

Some people who have spent long hours mapping the radio signal strength above geological structures discovered there are patterns where the radio signals become very strong or very weak depending on anomalies that exist under the ground. This research has always been suspect because of the huge amount of interference from the noise sources mentioned above. Thus the mapping of these subterranean anomalies is not very consistent. The best results are obtained if repeat sampling is done the same time of day after a survey is performed.

One of the subterranean anomalies that was discovered to show a radio signal anomaly at the surface is long-time buried metals. These also are difficult to locate because of the huge amount of noise and interference. The people looking for radio wave signal anomalies are not always fully aware of all the influences that will obscure the anomaly above a long time buried metal object. There are many geological formations beneath the ground that also will cause an anomaly perhaps unknown to the hunter, even when the atmospheric noise conditions are optimum. Thus, we see many failed efforts from these hunters. Among the passive radio anomaly hunting methods, some experimenters have selected from among the existing "noise signals" to track the location of their anomalies, and locate things under the ground.

For the more sophisticated treasure hunting experimenter, The idea of using an active circuit seems appealing. By transmitting a radio wave with either a coil or antenna, the transmitted signal can be controlled precisely. A small transmitter can control the frequency, signal strength, broadcast pattern, etc. to suit the existing conditions. It appears this is what esteban is doing based on the locators he described. If you don't believe there is a radio wave signal strength phenomenon that can be detected above long time buried metals, then you can abandon any further study into the matter. If esteban does not want to divulge the details of his circuitry, then it is his business to keep his circuits private.

There are a number of other researchers who have also discovered this phenomenon, using radio wave surveys as well as by measuring other physical anomalies in the air above buried targets and geological structures. When you look at all the methods mining companies use to survey their land, and make an overlay map, you will see several of the physical surveys have strong correlations, and when used together can lead to 70% or better success rate in finding the ore deposits they are looking for. Some of these same physical properties are capable of influencing the radio signal strength above the ground. In some cases, the influence is not measurable, but does this change when we add a well controlled transmitted signal?

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
I don't wanna be polemic here BUT
"Max is not interested in learning what you want to know. He is here on a witch-hunt to fill the forum with his diatribe anytime somebody gives information that may lead to understanding LRL principles. To better illustrate his purpose, look in his thread titled "Skeptic's Bar (No crappy, no party !)" and other posts he makes using only opinions that often are incongruous to know facts. His purpose is to prove LRLs can't work and criticize anyone who gives any information that could be used to understand something about this topic. Thus, I would not expect esteban to put any details of his discoveries in this forum while Max continues to post here."

Oh man... so I'm the problem now ??? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Esteban don't answer our questions , disappears like Count Dracula.... and I'm the problem ??? :razz:

"He is here on a witch-hunt to fill the forum with his diatribe anytime somebody gives information that may lead to understanding LRL principles. "

Eh ? anytime somebody gives information that may lead ...??? which informations ??? 300KHz ? this is the information ?
Or 80Khz ? BLA BLA BLA

Esteban disappeared... and don't provide any good information... that's why you are upset with me ? :rolleyes:
Ask him... if you'll find I mean... must be somewhere in SouthAmerica.

"To better illustrate his purpose, look in his thread titled "Skeptic's Bar (No crappy, no party !)" and other posts he makes using only opinions that often are incongruous to know facts."

Some are facts not opinions or jokes.
For example: FBI sued Quadro... this is a fact !
Quadro Tracker is a piece of empty plastic... this is a fact !
Quantico's labs say that, not me ! Fact.

"His purpose is to prove LRLs can't work and criticize anyone who gives any information that could be used to understand something about this topic."

No, no... I asked Esteban to post a schematic. I promised I'll excuse with him, and admit he's right on LRLs if posted schematic/plan work to detect a coin ,on surface soil, from 2 meters away . Read the previous posts by me.

You cannot say that "my purpose is prove LRLs can't work" cause of the request above... no, no.

Ask yourself why he don't post it instead. :lol:

"who gives any information that could be used to understand something about this topic"

Eh ??? Who is that person ???
Esteban disappeared, can't you remember?
Where is he ?

"Thus, I would not expect esteban to put any details of his discoveries in this forum while Max continues to post here."

Oh yeah... it's me... yeah. :shocked:

What to say... your only argumentation about the FACT Esteban isn't posting anything and is missing in action... is that's my fault.

Great. Very clever.

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi,
I'm very upset... read my previous post and then...
DAMN ! Used 3 times don't with 3rd person singular ! :nono:

he doesn't
he doesn't
he doesn't

Esteban come here... lets start an english conversation about ions and piles! :rolleyes:

Have to improve my English! :)
And if btw you have that circuit... post it !

Make us this gift ! ;)

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi,
have to call "America's Most Wanted" to find Esteban ? :lol:

Please respond senor.

We are awaiting for your answer and possibly the schematic/plan.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,
Perhaps you don't understand what people think about your posts. Lets take a look at some of the statements from your posts in the past couple weeks:

• Gold ions generation depends on many factors but no need of any long time...
• I still think that's a matter of hours and days if right conditions are present in the soil.
• Cannot see any good reason why e.g. gold ions have to concentrate or increase in number with long time last.
• after 1 month or 1 million years you'll have about the same amount of free gold ions in the soil.
• For me all this talking about "long time buried gold" that produce tons of ions is just another fake argument flying around LRL... BS.
• Changes nothing, no more gold ions, no remote location: NO IONIC LRL.
• No just-electronic handheld device could detect that ions. This is a fact.

• Have no time to read tons of documents about how microbes could give you the map of treasure...
• for sure LRL design is not my goal.Now you say:I don't wanna be polemic here BUT
Oh man... so I'm the problem now ??? ... that's why you are upset with me ?
You cannot say that "my purpose is prove LRLs can't work" cause of the request above...

Anybody who reads this forum knows what your real purpose is. We all know you are looking for a way to prove any circuit diagram cannot possibly work, just as you tried to prove buried metal chemistry does not work the way that chemists demonstrated. We all know you will ignore facts in front of you in order to prove you are right and millions of reports from scientists research are wrong. We know your purpose is to prove any circuitry presented cannot work even if the designers are successful with their circuits. We know your goal is not to design a working LRL, because you told us it is not.

"... that's why you are upset with me ?"
But you are mistaken. I am not upset with you. I think you are funny. It makes me laugh when I see someone who tries to convince other people he is very knowledgeable, and at the same time says he does not have time to read documents that prove he doesn't know what he is talking about. When I read your posts, it makes me laugh the same as if I read a publication from a member of the "Flat Earth Society" trying to prove the earth is flat. I suspect a few other readers have the same experience when reading your posts, but I think most would rather you stop clogging up the forum with stupid posts that don't add anything of value, and only serve to attempt to get others to provide you with more fodder to fuel your silly diatribe.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,
Perhaps you don't understand what people think about your posts. Lets take a look at some of the statements from your posts in the past couple weeks:

Now you say:

Anybody who reads this forum knows what your real purpose is. We all know you are looking for a way to prove any circuit diagram cannot possibly work, just as you tried to prove buried metal chemistry does not work the way that chemists demonstrated. We all know you will ignore facts in front of you in order to prove you are right and millions of reports from scientists research are wrong. We know your purpose is to prove any circuitry presented cannot work even if the designers are successful with their circuits. We know your goal is not to design a working LRL, because you told us it is not.

"... that's why you are upset with me ?"
But you are mistaken. I am not upset with you. I think you are funny. It makes me laugh when I see someone who tries to convince other people he is very knowledgeable, and at the same time says he does not have time to read documents that prove he doesn't know what he is talking about. When I read your posts, it makes me laugh the same as if I read a publication from a member of the "Flat Earth Society" trying to prove the earth is flat. I suspect a few other readers have the same experience when reading your posts, but I think most would rather you stop clogging up the forum with stupid posts that don't add anything of value, and only serve to attempt to get others to provide you with more fodder to fuel your silly diatribe.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
"We all know you are looking for a way to prove any circuit diagram cannot possibly work, just as you tried to prove buried metal chemistry does not work the way that chemists demonstrated. "

Suppose I want to see that circuit ? Where is it ?
Where is that "circuit diagram" you're talking about ???
Cannot see anything but just your silly contestation against me.

"We know your purpose is to prove any circuitry presented cannot work even if the designers are successful with their circuits. "

WHERE IS THAT CIRCUIT ?
WHO PROVED WHAT ??? TO WHO ??? ARE YOU THE WITNESS ???
OF WHAT ???

You are talking of NOTHING JP. VACUUM.

"I think you are funny. It makes me laugh when I see someone who tries to convince other people he is very knowledgeable, and at the same time says he does not have time to read documents that prove he doesn't know what he is talking about."

I have few time. I'm a busy man...That's true... but you can't make me belive that microbes can indicate you where the gold is... using just a (supposed working) LRL... without using instead lab analisys.

Can you ? I think not. Have you a working electronic-LRL ? A schematic ?
Something really working apart some papers ???

My friend I can find double of your documents like these... and then ?
These give the key to just-electronic-LRL design ?
Ionic detection again ???

Still the same stuff... columns of ions, tons of ions ???
Where do you see them ?
Telluric currents ?

BLA BLA BLA

"When I read your posts, it makes me laugh the same as if I read a publication from a member of the "Flat Earth Society" trying to prove the earth is flat."

Well... someone here said that currents are like static fields, not me.
I'm the ignorant here ? I'm blind ?

If you say that... have to trust! :razz:

The Earth is flat ? Uhm... who is the new Columbus ???
You ? or Esteban ?

C'mon give us the schematic if so.
I wanna see the NEW WORLD OF LRL.

Give us a proof that your theory is truth, science.

And I'll belive at your words in a microsecond ! I swear !

But till then, you talk like Esteban... with any proof in your hands.
Just funny pictures and lots of papers.

You have no LRLs... and Esteban the same. Just fantasies.

Best regards,
Max

BTW: you posted that funny picture ...do you remember ?
I think you fallen in the trap of false prophets here.

[Max]

SORRY FOR THE TYPO ERROR
"But till then, you talk like Esteban... with any proof in your hands."

I MEAN

But till then, you talk like Esteban... withOUT any proof in your hands.

[J_Player]

Hi Max,
You have already proved what I say is true, and continue just as I described.
Do you really think anyone reading this forum doesn't know your true purpose?
No amount of your arguments will convince me that it is not possible to develop
a working LRL. But I still find it humorous to read your silly diatribe.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,
You have already proved what I say is true, and continue just as I described.
Do you really think anyone reading this forum doesn't know your true purpose?
No amount of your arguments will convince me that it is not possible to develop
a working LRL. But I still find it humorous to read your silly diatribe.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
I don't know if I'm silly or if diatribe is silly or whatever.

WHERE IS THE SCHEMATIC ?
WHERE IS ESTEBAN ?

That's what interest me.

HAVE YOU A WORKING LRL ?
HAVE YOU A WORKING DESIGN, SCHEMATIC ?

Cause if not... your suppot to nonsense isn't less silly than my "diatribe" here.

Read all this stuff to understand nothing... :razz:
and belive in Esteban's claims with no proofs.

It's not silly that ?

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi,
here is a schematic by Esteban... he said something 10 years ago if remember well.
He claimed it work as LRL so could suit requirements here.

Do you read anything ??? :lol:

I read only (7)555 ---> ICM7555

And that say everything of the state of the art of his technology.
Or not ?

On the front-end you'll see a broadband "something" amplifier with 3 antenna... another StarTrek pistol. :razz:

Just another pearl... of an older diatribe.

NOW BUILD IT (IF YOU CAN) AND FIND THE GOLD.

But if he'll post the right schematic, and we find it's working like in requirements I swear I'll do what I've said.

Till then my dear JP, and all the others here... you have to built your LRL from that pearl. :lol:

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,
These are your questions? HAVE YOU A WORKING LRL ?
HAVE YOU A WORKING DESIGN, SCHEMATIC ?Sorry max, your tricks won't work on me. I know what is your purpose, same as anyone else who reads this forum. We all know you don't have time to read the facts because you told us you don't. We all know you are only here to make trouble for anyone who does not play your games. If you recall, I already posted long ago that if I had a working LRL, I would not be talking about it in this forum, so you can forget about seeing any LRL schematics from me.

The fact is I really don't care what silly tricks you try to launch against people who are interested in learning about LRLs. You have no power over my decisions. Apparently only esteban cares what you say. And it looks to me like nothing you can say or do will provoke esteban to show you his circuit diagrams. Apparently, he did not accept your cordial invitation.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Hi Max:) .
All we have a part from right:) . However why you search for exotic circuits with exotic materials??? Possibly it is something very simple..... so much simple that we cannot imagine it, whenever one 555 and one 741 are enough. In any case if the drawing was appearred clearly I would manufacture for trial.
I do not agree:nono: with all here, simple I try to don't be negative and to have open brain, because who it knows..... perhaps some time I will understand :) something more.
My Regards:)

[Max]

Hi,
real problem is that NO SCHEMATIC is being posted by anyone.

I don't want JP's schematic... I even don't know if he has one schematic or one working LRL untill I read his last post...
cause he said me before "someone" realized a working LRL... not that this "someone" actully is JP himself and HE have one.

Geo, I agree with yuor point of view... also me could give a try even at a simple circuit with 555 etc if I have one that is claimed to be a working LRL.
You are right on that approach, could be also a simple thing... no need of strange exotic components... depends on the principle of operation.

My thoughts about ICM7555 are related to some old zahori projects that are proved not working finding metals from long distance.

I think that the schematic I've reposted is just another Zahori, with mods by Esteban.

Maybe I'm wrong... I can't read the schematic cause is low resolution... I think he made that for the same reason the person who posted the pointronic98 schematic altered it in a way you can't build anything... and test if work or not... see with your eyes.

They don't give proofs... cause they haven't.
This is my idea of LRL.

If I'm wrong why don't anyone post anything we can test ?

Kind regards,
Max

[Nihil Roma Maius]

The 555 is for to generate an audible tone for time 1/2 second for each detection. Nothing special, and necessary.

[Max]

Hi,
problem is that it's only thing I can read there.

Cannot talk about anything else... cause the resolution is too low.
Just see 3 antenna... but then is a blackhole.

Seems a zahori from the simple "design" and "placement".

Problem is that there is nothing real to talk about in this thread !
Apart the Esteban's missing in action. :lol:

I'd like having a clue of where is he! :rolleyes:

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

.

[Max]

.

Oh... nice !
Thanks JP.
I only miss his schematic now. :razz:

Have you a clue for that ?

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

I will check with my LRL friends for some schematics to send to you.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,

I will check with my LRL friends for some schematics to send to you.

Best wishes,
J_P

:nono:
But I want Esteban's one ! :lol:

[J_Player]

I think esteban don't like the things you say about him and his circuits. So he don't give circuits for you to see. Maybe this is your problem.

[Max]

I think esteban don't like the things you say about him and his circuits. So he don't give circuits for you to see. Maybe this is your problem.

He doesn't give them to anyone... not just me. Cause they don't work. :razz:
Not my problem, maybe your.

[Nihil Roma Maius]

He doesn't give them to anyone... not just me. Cause they don't work. :razz:

Who knows, maybe you're wrong!!! :lol: :lol:

[Max]

He doesn't give them to anyone... not just me. Cause they don't work. :razz:

Who knows, maybe you're wrong!!! :lol: :lol:






You have ? Oh yeah... you are same people. :lol:
Like I said before.

[aft_72005]

Hi to all :)
This is pontrrnic 98 circuit that was uploaded by Nihil
Roma Maius in inside minero-part 1 page.
I wrote for Nihil Roma Maius that send it with better
Resolution .
Nihil Roma Maius ,why I don’t have any reply from you yet?:frown: