Hi Max,
You forget, when we are looking for long time buried metal, there is often a column of metal ions in the soil that begins at the buried metal and continues to the surface. The effects of such an anomaly in the soil have several implications that will cause measurable changes in the telluric properties beneath the soil. Are you aware that mining companies use both telluric and magnetotelluric methods to explore the structure beneath the ground and find ore bodies? Or do you only rely on commonly believed ideas that suggest these methods are not useful to locate metals under the ground? Have you ever read the reports on the precision of gamma detectors used in mining exploration?
Your previous post said many things that are only common beliefs rather than facts. The real facts do not exist in the top of your head. They can be found by reading the reports from researchers who actually measure these things. When you use faulty information from the top of your head, then you can expect to reach faulty conclusions. But if you were to study the actual findings from people who took the trouble to measure these things, then you would have better information to decide what is possible.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Max
Big task find one suitable principle
|
I do not believe that measuring one single physical property is a good solution to constructing a long range locator. I believe a reliable LRL will measure an anomaly within the context of several supporting influences associated with the buried target. Thus I think it is not a simple project to whip up a pico-ammeter connected to a field detector or magnetometer. I think if you actually study the processes involved in long-time buried metals, you will find that you need to devise some fairly sophisticated circuitry and perform precise calibrations in order to achieve any degree of reliability in detecting these anomalies. But first you will need to discover which phenomena actually show some measurable signals rather than to make a conclusion from the top of your head, without considering what methods the researchers used to find these signals.
If there was a simple method to locate buried metal at long range with good reliability, then the builders of Zahori would be bringing home amazing treasures and posting photos that make your eyes pop out. You would see tax agents parked outside their homes who follow them everywhere they go. The same is true for people who advertise LRLs that find amazing treasures from long distance. Do you see these LRL advertisers collecting amazing treasures from the ground, or do you see them trying to find money from the bank account of people who buy the detector?
If I was too lazy to research the details of how a metal detector works, I might tell you it is an interesting theory, but look at these reasons why it would not be possible to build a metal detector:
• No electromagnetic coil could make detect non-magnetic metals in the air or under the ground. It must be magnetic to respond to a magnetic field.
• An electromagnetic field must travel too far in the ground to detect buried metals, therefore it is unreliable.
• There are hundreds of magnetic interferences that will make any magnetic signal unreliable.
• The magnetic variations in the soil would interfere with any magnetic field that you try to transmit into the ground. therefore you have no idea what you are looking at under the ground
Sound familiar? These are the same kind of reasons you are giving for why a LRL cannot be developed. If I was ignorant enough to not understand how a metal detector works, and I did not want to read anything that explains metal detector circuits, then I might use these arguments to prevent myself from ever believing metal detection can work, or from trying to build a metal detector. The fact is some of these wrong arguments I posted have some truth in them. We find that there is a very sophisticated art to properly tuning a metal detector to overcome these problems. This is the same for the art of building a long range locator, except it is more difficult for a LRL because of the extremely small signals we are working with, and the combination of phenomena influencing the readings.
I have no interest in trying to prove to you that there are methods of locating buried metals at long range. My objective is to provide some real science involved with buried metals that can be demonstrated and proven by thousands of pages of research. This is the Geotech forum where the purpose is to share technical knowledge, not to spread misconceptions about how geotechnology works. It is not necessary that you believe me. I only hope that people who come here trying to learn the secrets of locating treasure will have some real science to use in their experimenting instead of relying on opinions that it is not possible to develop a LRL.
Best wishes,
J_P