[Theseus]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Theseus,
Buried metals do exhibit some of the "field" effects associated with halos. To start with, after a metal object is buried for a long enough time, it will corrode. Even gold and platinum corrode as do all other metals. This has been observed and measured by hundreds of scientists all over the world. When buried metals corrode, the corroded metal that departs from the buried object becomes metal ions dissolved in the soil, which begin to migrate upward very slowly in a column shape above the buried metal. Eventually these ions reach the surface of the soil, where they bind with other soil constituents within the last 10-30 cam of the surface. For a large ore deposit, this column will appear to be a very large column taking the shape of the ore deposit. but for a single metal object, it will look more like a single column. Thousands of scientists and test technicians claim to have observed and measured this mechanism. Not just a few select individuals. If you google "MMI testing" and MMI, you will find over a million reports of tests that located buried metals (mostly gold) from places all over the world.

J_Player, I agree with everything you've said about the mobile metal ion technology. The effect of these "mobile" ions, as a result of deeply buried underground mineral deposits, is a well-known phenomenon and IS being utilized (exploited) today to "help" discover locations of certain buried mineral deposits.

The "halo effect" in relation to buried metal within metal detector range has been reported by more than a handful of select individuals.

I am personally one of the detectorists who can say I have in fact observed what can only be described as a "halo" effect when recovering a deeply buried single coin. Can't say that I experienced it a lot but out of the thousands of older coins recovered, I probably noticed it less than a dozen times. That is, the target indicated as something much larger or perhaps shallower than it actually was. The only thing I could attribute it to would be what "we" call the "halo effect". Actually, IMHO, it is a leeching out of metalic "material, ions or whatever", that looks like a larger target than it really is.

Now, if we use a little logic, we will see that the observed trail of metal ions in the soil above a long-time buried target would be necessarily removed in the process of recovering the target. Thus we would also remove the central core of the "halo effect". This can explain how the detectorists came to find that the target returned to a normal signal after recovering it. We have similar reports from LRL proponents who described their experiences when digging a target that was endowed with this "halo effect" that they call "the phenomenon".

Thus, the "halo effect" is not an imaginary device invented by charlatans to convince people to by overpriced electronic junk. It is a fact that has been studied and measured by scientists, and is being used to recover tons of gold and other industrial metals.

But there is a missing link:
We know there is a trail of ions above long-time buried metals which has several secondary phenomena ocurring. The secondary phenomena include:
1. Ground battery action of the metal ions reacting with other ions in the soil to produce a small voltage.
2. A small current flow due to the ground battery action of the metal ion column.
3. A distortion of the natural telluric current flow in the vicinity of the metal ion column.
4. An increased soil conductivity in the vicinity of the metal ion column.
5. An increased in atmospheric charge leakage through the air at the location of the metal ion column, which continues through the column before dispersing and mixing with natural telluric currents.
6. A reduced voltage gradient in the air above the location of the metal ion column.
7. A distortion of the earth's magnetic field at the location of the metal ion column due to currents moving through the column.
9. An anomaly in certain subatomic particle and other space energy emissions such as cosmic rays at the location of the ion column.

With all those secondary effects and more taking place at the location of this dissolved metal ion column, it seems that one or more of them could be theoretically used to advantage in order to locate the ion column, and the buried metal object below it.

The MMI method is to simply dig soil samples and perform very precise tests to see if there is a metal ion anomaly in any samples taken over a field that is surveyed. A higher than average reading of dissolved metal ions tells them there is something buried below. But the LRL proponents claim they have built electronic detectors that can sense one or more of these associated secondary effects. The missing link is that we only have claims and theories that LRL proponents have electronic detectors which are detecting these effects.

A missing link for sure!

And this missing liink brings me back to my previous posting. Unfortunately, I was not that clear in how I verbalized my thoughts/posting. I was thinking some things but my thoughts did not make it into the posting. (sorry)

When I said; "If only buried metals (treasure) actually "caused" these so-called phenomenon, halo or fields." I was thinking in terms of what is being "claimed" by a few individuals that they are detecting at long distances with their LRLs. In that regard, and in light of the lack of validation for their claims; I still believe there is NO SUCH phenomenon taking place "above" the soil (or slightly sub-surface) that can be detected as an anomaly by the LRL contraptions proposed here in this forum. If evidence to the contrary is presented, and can be validated by others, I would be among the first to change my mind - and say so.

So where does this leave us?

We have a scientifically documented "halo effect" , but just a bunch of claims by people who say they found a way to lock onto some part of this halo effect, and no test measurements to back up what they are saying, not even a demonstration to show it working.

Exactly!

So what do you think?

Is the "halo effect" for real?
Are thse LRLs for real?

Best wishes,
J_P

My personal answers would be: Yes, it is real but it is strictly a geochemical process that occurs within the soil, and might be evidenced by what detectorists have experienced or what can be analyzed through MMI testing.

As far as the second question; No!