Gold Sample

[Geo]

Hi.
I have noticed that many LRL manufacturers use samples gold or silver in the head of their LRL. Specifically I have seen such samples at all models of Mineoro, in Iconos, in the Ver-Tex in Magic_PD etc. I would like to hear your views upon this matter.

Regards

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I have noticed that many LRL manufacturers use samples gold or silver in the head of their LRL. Specifically I have seen such samples at all models of Mineoro, in Iconos, in the Ver-Tex in Magic_PD etc. I would like to hear your views upon this matter.

Regards

Hi Geo,

I have also heard of soldering gold samples in sensors for Mineoro and other LRLs.
I also read about other LRLs that are a dowsing rod that has a sample chamber with a small sample of gold inside (like Anderson rod).
And there are other LRLs which are a dowsing rod with an empty sample chamber where you are instructed to put a sample of the material you want to find in the chamber (Dell rod).
The sample can be gold or other materials.

My thinking is there is nothing from a gold sample or other materials that can cause an electronic LRL to find gold.
Anyone who understands electronics knows this is true.
If gold put into the circuit helps you to find gold buried in the ground, then every computer which has gold plated contacts will also help you to find treasure.
But it is not true.
This is only a legend that LRL manufacturers made to become popular to believe for ignorant people who have no education of electronics.

My thinking is Mineoro inventors were reading the advertising for other manufacturers of LRLs.
When they read that people put gold samples in the chambers for their dowsing rods, then they think it is a good thing to solder a gold sample into their Mineoro LRL,
Why?
Because they know some people will open the Mineoro LRL and look to see what is inside.
The think that when LRL hackers see the gold sample soldered, then they will believe the Mineoro is working by magic principle.

But the problems is...
Everybody who bought Mineoro found out it does not find treasure.
So, when Mineoro inventors put gold sample inside, they prove it does not help to find treasure.

Do you think this is another Mineoro trick to make people think they have a working LRL?
Is it the same as the Mineoro tricks they use at the factory test grounds to detect plastic markers?


Best wishes,
J_P

[taliesin]

[mikebg]

Manufacturers know that the samples have no influence on the operation of LRL.
I am convinced that they know because in old LRLs there are samples comprised inside glass ampoule. A piece of gold or silver foil is visible. This view affects well fools who think that if there is gold or silver in the ampoule, the LRL will detect gold or silver.

While the foil is cheap because it contains very little metal, it still costs money. Recently LRLs come complete with samples sealed in opaque ampoules. My friends have ever broken one such ampoule. Inside they found bundle resistors connected in series and in parallel without any sense of it. This misleading can be made by people who know that this is nonsense.

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I have noticed that many LRL manufacturers use samples gold or silver in the head of their LRL. Specifically I have seen such samples at all models of Mineoro, in Iconos, in the Ver-Tex in Magic_PD etc. I would like to hear your views upon this matter.

Regards

By gold built in LRL manufacturers want to ensure that you will find at least one piece of gold by using their LRL, namely just this embedded in the LRL.

[mikebg]

Originally Posted by WM6

By gold built in LRL manufacturers want to ensure that you will find at least one piece of gold by using their LRL, namely just this embedded in the LRL.

When you see gold or silver foil inside the ampoule, the manifacturer finds you

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by mikebg

My friends have ever broken one such ampoule. Inside they found bundle resistors connected in series and in parallel without any sense of it.

Perhaps they use 5% tolerance resistors for gold, and 10% tolerance resistors for silver.

[mikebg]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

Perhaps they use 5% tolerance resistors for gold, and 10% tolerance resistors for silver.

Perhaps, however operator can not see gold and silver rings. All boundle of resistors is covered by tar.

[Geo]

Hi.
Ofcourse you know more than me, this is the reason that i attached this thread here. My PD has a sample of gold and it works very good (you saw the video). I made another PD with silver sample but it don't detect no silver no gold. So, what is happening????
Also i worked with another LRL who had a ferrite with 2 coils. This LRL detected a gold coin from 20... 30 m very easy, but when i removed the sample it stop to work. What was happened??? I can't explain it, but i am sure that it is not so simple as long as lots of laughter here...

Regards

[Geo]

Originally Posted by mikebg

Manufacturers know that the samples have no influence on the operation of LRL.
I am convinced that they know because in old LRLs there are samples comprised inside glass ampoule. A piece of gold or silver foil is visible. This view affects well fools who think that if there is gold or silver in the ampoule, the LRL will detect gold or silver.

While the foil is cheap because it contains very little metal, it still costs money. Recently LRLs come complete with samples sealed in opaque ampoules. My friends have ever broken one such ampoule. Inside they found bundle resistors connected in series and in parallel without any sense of it. This misleading can be made by people who know that this is nonsense.

Hi.
I opened a Ver-Tex. Took at least 5 days to take off all accessories. I found 3 samples (2 gold and one silver) hidden too well. If it was to deceive purchasers would they place at point that seems rather a point where not being able to see it if not dissolve the device. I believe that something secret is hidden behind the samples

Regards

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
Ofcourse you know more than me, this is the reason that i attached this thread here. My PD has a sample of gold and it works very good (you saw the video). I made another PD with silver sample but it don't detect no silver no gold. So, what is happening????
Also i worked with another LRL who had a ferrite with 2 coils. This LRL detected a gold coin from 20... 30 m very easy, but when i removed the sample it stop to work. What was happened??? I can't explain it, but i am sure that it is not so simple as long as lots of laughter here...

Regards

Hi Geo,

I did not see a video of your PD working very good to detect gold.
I saw a video of your PD making beeps inside a garage that could be caused from many things that are near to where you hold the PD. For this reason, I do not think I saw a video to convince me your PD was beeping at the gold. Maybe if you show a real video outside on flat ground where there is no other things near the PD like walls and ceilings with wires inside, then I can see a video that looks more like a real demonstration made in Portugal. Maybe if I see WM6 also watching to make sure there is no power lines near and no tricks, I will think I am seeing a real test. I am sure WM6 would want to see this PD follow the gold sample when he moves it to different locations. This kind of demonstration would help me to believe it is detecting gold -- better than when I see it only beep at one location where the gold is put inside a garage.

But to answer your question... What is happening to make the beeps?
The solution to your problem is you tested two different coils with different construction.
You know if you make two different DD coils, they will not work exactly the same unless you make very precise tuning to null the coils exactly. In the case of your PD, you do not have DD coils. But you have other coils that are connected to a very sensitive amplifier that is nearly unstable. So a very slight difference in the coil inductance, or the null point will make a large difference of when the circuit board makes beeps.

The solution is to not change the coil. Leave everything the exact same, but only remove the gold sample and replace with a different sample. You can do this with un-soldering the piece of gold, or by installing a 2-pin socket that you can plug in the sample of gold or other material to test many different metals.

I think you could make a piece of copper the same size and shape as your gold sample, then change the gold to copper. I don't think you will find different beeps performance if you change only your sample. But I could be wrong. There is a very small electrical effect that can be caused by thermocouple voltage when two different metals are in contact. It may be possible there is a slight voltage offset caused by connecting the two metals to make enough difference to change the signal level where the amplifier makes beeps. Or maybe it can even the wave shape, depending on what kind of alloy metal of gold and copper or other metals. There is also a possible electrical difference that could be caused by eddy currents if you are winding a coil wire around the gold sample. If you switch the gold sample for copper, then the eddy currents generated from copper will have more impedance to the coil current than a gold sample. This can also make a change in the circuit operation if the sample is inside a magnetic field generated by the coil.

Unless I see a convincing video that makes me believe your PD is beeping at only the gold target, then I will think it is a trick that fooled you to believe it is beeping at gold, and it was really beeping because other things near the PD made it beep.


Best wishes,
J_P

[Götz von Berlichingen]

Why would you put a Gold Sample in a Gold Detector ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sympathetic_magic
Thats the real Reason.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Geo,

I did not see a video of your PD working very good to detect gold.
I saw a video of your PD making beeps inside a garage that could be caused from many things that are near to where you hold the PD. For this reason, I do not think I saw a video to convince me your PD was beeping at the gold. Maybe if you show a real video outside on flat ground where there is no other things near the PD like walls and ceilings with wires inside, then I can see a video that looks more like a real demonstration made in Portugal. Maybe if I see WM6 also watching to make sure there is no power lines near and no tricks, I will think I am seeing a real test. I am sure WM6 would want to see this PD follow the gold sample when he moves it to different locations. This kind of demonstration would help me to believe it is detecting gold -- better than when I see it only beep at one location where the gold is put inside a garage.

But to answer your question... What is happening to make the beeps?
The solution to your problem is you tested two different coils with different construction.
You know if you make two different DD coils, they will not work exactly the same unless you make very precise tuning to null the coils exactly. In the case of your PD, you do not have DD coils. But you have other coils that are connected to a very sensitive amplifier that is nearly unstable. So a very slight difference in the coil inductance, or the null point will make a large difference of when the circuit board makes beeps.

The solution is to not change the coil. Leave everything the exact same, but only remove the gold sample and replace with a different sample. You can do this with un-soldering the piece of gold, or by installing a 2-pin socket that you can plug in the sample of gold or other material to test many different metals.

I think you could make a piece of copper the same size and shape as your gold sample, then change the gold to copper. I don't think you will find different beeps performance if you change only your sample. But I could be wrong. There is a very small electrical effect that can be caused by thermocouple voltage when two different metals are in contact. It may be possible there is a slight voltage offset caused by connecting the two metals to make enough difference to change the signal level where the amplifier makes beeps. Or maybe it can even the wave shape, depending on what kind of alloy metal of gold and copper or other metals. There is also a possible electrical difference that could be caused by eddy currents if you are winding a coil wire around the gold sample. If you switch the gold sample for copper, then the eddy currents generated from copper will have more impedance to the coil current than a gold sample. This can also make a change in the circuit operation if the sample is inside a magnetic field generated by the coil.

Unless I see a convincing video that makes me believe your PD is beeping at only the gold target, then I will think it is a trick that fooled you to believe it is beeping at gold, and it was really beeping because other things near the PD made it beep.


Best wishes,
J_P

Hi J_P.
I changed the gold sample with identical but copper. The results were quite different. Certainly I think we should look away from "conventional" electronics to find the solution. Where.... I do not know.
With respect to my PD I shoot video in an area that I think are much more difficult compared with a detection in the countryside. Maybe some other time to get a video in the countryside away from electrical wires and to send it at your email but not here.
But here the question is not my PD but the samples at LRLs

Regards

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi J_P.
I changed the gold sample with identical but copper. The results were quite different. Certainly I think we should look away from "conventional" electronics to find the solution. Where.... I do not know.
With respect to my PD I shoot video in an area that I think are much more difficult compared with a detection in the countryside. Maybe some other time to get a video in the countryside away from electrical wires and to send it at your email but not here.
But here the question is not my PD but the samples at LRLs

Regards

Hi Geo,

You understand I am not convinced your PD is detecting gold.
But let us take a hypothetical story and consider I am to take your PD with a gold sample in the coil and test it myself with my own hands.
And I observe it to beep at gold when I point it at a gold ring far in the distance.

The first thing I will do is not to look away from conventional electronics. I will first take some measurements in the circuit with high impedance instruments to see what is different when I observe it beeping at gold than when it is not beeping and gold target is removed from the test field. I would measure every stage to see what is really changing and causing the beeps. Then I would change the coil sample to copper and make the same measurements with the gold target put in the test field and then removed. This will give me some understandable base data to begin with.

Next, I would look closely at this base data to see what is the difference in the circuit signals at different stages of the amplifier when I took readings with gold sample and with copper sample put in coil. I would be paying special attention to very small millivolt differences that could be caused by thermocouple effects, and I would also be looking for slight differences in the eddy currents to see what effect they have on the front end small signals. I would do all this in a shielded and grounded work area so there are no false readings caused by tiny noise signals from the air. This is where I think a lot of errors are made by people who try to measure small signal differences.

After I make all these measurements, then I will probably see there is a difference in eddy current response from the gold sample that was placed inside the coil B field compared to the eddy current response from the copper sample. I would also probably find difference in the impedance that the same coil saw. I suspect I might find the gold sample caused less impedance to the coil. We know a normal metal detector VLF coil can see the difference between a small copper piece and a small gold piece. If I cannot see this difference in your more sensitive amplifier, then I would think I made a serious error in grounding my test equipment.

Of course, maybe I could just say it was not important to set up good shielding and grounding at a work station to get the exact measurements of small signal variations, because I already know there is no difference to be seen. But I would not do this, because I have already found from experience, that performing these small signal tests properly will show readings that I usually do not expect from simply guessing what I think the results will be. And I find that making proper measurements will usually show what is really happening inside the circuit instead of what we think is probably happening. This is where you will find out if the PD is really detecting gold, or if something else is making it beep. If you are lucky, maybe you will discover the gold sample is not responding like we expect it to from conventional eddy current electronics and the known resistance of gold. Maybe you will see how it is actually performing to help the circuit detect gold.

Then, after actually performing test point readings throughout the circuit from a shielded and grounded work area, if I see readings which show the copper and gold samples are not responding like conventional electronics tells us eddy currents and dissimilar metal junctions behave, I will think it is time to look for some more evidence in the field.

At this point I would set up some experiments to see how far I can detect a gold target. I would first find a large flat field that shows no signals at all from the PD, and then put a gold target in the field to see how far distance the PD can detect it. I would also move the target around in the field to see if the PD also detects it at the same distance. If it works as you say, then I will sign a contract with Carl-NC to take his $25,000 prize test.
And I will be happy that I have a true working LRL that finds only gold at long distances.

But remember...
This is only a hypothetical story I wrote that never ever happened in my experience.
I never saw a gold sample cause an electronic detector to find gold.
This is only the kind of thing I read stories about -- for magic PDs that nobody can demonstrate to work to find a hidden gold target from long range. I only hear stories...

So I am happy to believe everything is all true....
Same as I am happy to read fantasy adventure stories, and watch fantasy movies at the theatre.
These are very entertaining for good reading, and for good watching at the movies,
As long as I never pay 7,500 eu to buy these fairy tales, then I will remain happy with them.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Morgan]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I opened a Ver-Tex. Took at least 5 days to take off all accessories. I found 3 samples (2 gold and one silver) hidden too well. If it was to deceive purchasers would they place at point that seems rather a point where not being able to see it if not dissolve the device. I believe that something secret is hidden behind the samples

Regards

Cant find in internet information about VER-TEX LRL,can you post one picture?

[taliesin]

the way i see it .there are two types of members on geotech.one that are totally convinced that these concraptions(no typo) work and others who have some vested interest in prolonging these myths for their own financial gain.i've come to the conclusion talking to either or these groups of people is like trying to tell a Jehovah's Witnesse that there is no god.so this is the last time i waste my time on this subject.end of.

[goldfinder]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I have noticed that many LRL manufacturers use samples gold or silver in the head of their LRL. Specifically I have seen such samples at all models of Mineoro, in Iconos, in the Ver-Tex in Magic_PD etc. I would like to hear your views upon this matter.

Regards

I believe that very few or none understand why a "witness" such as gold or silver is put in the LRLs which are basically dowsing rods. Actually the reason is quite simple. There is a spectrum that I discovered which I call the inertial resonance spectrum. I discovered this many years ago when I was researching the so called Molecular Frequency Discriminator and the many others who got the same information that was incorporated in the MFD and similar devices.

There is a correlation with the molecular weight and an atomic inertial or gravitational "frequency". Very good dowsers can feel this energetic resonance that actually exists between similar gold samples. Research and theoretical work by Professor Helmut Mueller and his Global Scaling equations is touching on this. When the LRL user puts a gold sample in the witness chamber there is a greater "resonance" between him/her and any gold that may be in the vicinity. None of this is standard physics, electromagnetic energies, atomic particle radiation, etc.

One of these days I am going to write up the research on this but right now I am too busy. I will not answer questions on this so don't ask. Do your own research. The answers exist for this very interesting topic.
Goldfinder

[Götz von Berlichingen]

Its "Hartmut" Müller, not "Helmut", he is not really a Professor and he used his "Global Scaling" to steal Money from naive Investors.
Do your Homework and run this Article through Google Translator, its German: http://www.esowatch.com/ge/index.php...Global_Scaling
Link for the lazy: http://translate.google.de/translate...Global_Scaling
So, how trustworthy is this "Research" ?
Its always the same: "Global Scaling" made 6 million Euro (and got sued), Steorn sells "Free Energy", some other People sell Electronic Dowsing Rods.

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by goldfinder

I believe that very few or none understand why a "witness" such as gold or silver is put in the LRLs which are basically dowsing rods. Actually the reason is quite simple. There is a spectrum that I discovered which I call the inertial resonance spectrum. I discovered this many years ago when I was researching the so called Molecular Frequency Discriminator and the many others who got the same information that was incorporated in the MFD and similar devices.

There is a correlation with the molecular weight and an atomic inertial or gravitational "frequency". Very good dowsers can feel this energetic resonance that actually exists between similar gold samples. Research and theoretical work by Professor Helmut Mueller and his Global Scaling equations is touching on this. When the LRL user puts a gold sample in the witness chamber there is a greater "resonance" between him/her and any gold that may be in the vicinity. None of this is standard physics, electromagnetic energies, atomic particle radiation, etc.

One of these days I am going to write up the research on this but right now I am too busy. I will not answer questions on this so don't ask. Do your own research. The answers exist for this very interesting topic.
Goldfinder

Hi goldfinder,

Geo is not talking about a dowsing rod with a sample chamber where you put gold.
He is talking about an electronic VLF loop receiver that has a sample of gold positioned in the area of the receiver coil to cause the receiver to only beep when it is pointed at the direction where gold is buried.

This has nothing to do with dowsing.
It is an electronic tuner and amplifier/filter that is adjusted to make beeps when a signal is received above an adjustable threshold.
From what I have seen so far, it does not work.
If it did work, then we would see some evidence of it working.
But we don't.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Morgan

Cant find in internet information about VER-TEX LRL,can you post one picture?

Hi Morgan.
Take a photo (bad quality) from the Ver_tex

Regards

[Geo]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Geo,

You understand I am not convinced your PD is detecting gold.
But let us take a hypothetical story and consider I am to take your PD with a gold sample in the coil and test it myself with my own hands.
And I observe it to beep at gold when I point it at a gold ring far in the distance.

The first thing I will do is not to look away from conventional electronics. I will first take some measurements in the circuit with high impedance instruments to see what is different when I observe it beeping at gold than when it is not beeping and gold target is removed from the test field. I would measure every stage to see what is really changing and causing the beeps. Then I would change the coil sample to copper and make the same measurements with the gold target put in the test field and then removed. This will give me some understandable base data to begin with.

Next, I would look closely at this base data to see what is the difference in the circuit signals at different stages of the amplifier when I took readings with gold sample and with copper sample put in coil. I would be paying special attention to very small millivolt differences that could be caused by thermocouple effects, and I would also be looking for slight differences in the eddy currents to see what effect they have on the front end small signals. I would do all this in a shielded and grounded work area so there are no false readings caused by tiny noise signals from the air. This is where I think a lot of errors are made by people who try to measure small signal differences.

After I make all these measurements, then I will probably see there is a difference in eddy current response from the gold sample that was placed inside the coil B field compared to the eddy current response from the copper sample. I would also probably find difference in the impedance that the same coil saw. I suspect I might find the gold sample caused less impedance to the coil. We know a normal metal detector VLF coil can see the difference between a small copper piece and a small gold piece. If I cannot see this difference in your more sensitive amplifier, then I would think I made a serious error in grounding my test equipment.

Of course, maybe I could just say it was not important to set up good shielding and grounding at a work station to get the exact measurements of small signal variations, because I already know there is no difference to be seen. But I would not do this, because I have already found from experience, that performing these small signal tests properly will show readings that I usually do not expect from simply guessing what I think the results will be. And I find that making proper measurements will usually show what is really happening inside the circuit instead of what we think is probably happening. This is where you will find out if the PD is really detecting gold, or if something else is making it beep. If you are lucky, maybe you will discover the gold sample is not responding like we expect it to from conventional eddy current electronics and the known resistance of gold. Maybe you will see how it is actually performing to help the circuit detect gold.

Then, after actually performing test point readings throughout the circuit from a shielded and grounded work area, if I see readings which show the copper and gold samples are not responding like conventional electronics tells us eddy currents and dissimilar metal junctions behave, I will think it is time to look for some more evidence in the field.

At this point I would set up some experiments to see how far I can detect a gold target. I would first find a large flat field that shows no signals at all from the PD, and then put a gold target in the field to see how far distance the PD can detect it. I would also move the target around in the field to see if the PD also detects it at the same distance. If it works as you say, then I will sign a contract with Carl-NC to take his $25,000 prize test.
And I will be happy that I have a true working LRL that finds only gold at long distances.

But remember...
This is only a hypothetical story I wrote that never ever happened in my experience.
I never saw a gold sample cause an electronic detector to find gold.
This is only the kind of thing I read stories about -- for magic PDs that nobody can demonstrate to work to find a hidden gold target from long range. I only hear stories...

So I am happy to believe everything is all true....
Same as I am happy to read fantasy adventure stories, and watch fantasy movies at the theatre.
These are very entertaining for good reading, and for good watching at the movies,
As long as I never pay 7,500 eu to buy these fairy tales, then I will remain happy with them.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi J_P.
I can not do all this work you say. I have neither the time nor the necessary equipment to do all these tests. I started this issue in order to see what happens to the samples using a variety of manufacturers LRL (and not just the Mineoro) as well as a variety of tests that i made i saw a different function of lrl when using samples. Of course the operation of lrl was different than expected.
As regards the money of Carl-NC ... rather this is not the issue.
I must to remind you the proposal that made Esteban .......

Regards

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi J_P.
I can not do all this work you say. I have neither the time nor the necessary equipment to do all these tests. I started this issue in order to see what happens to the samples using a variety of manufacturers LRL (and not just the Mineoro) as well as a variety of tests that i made i saw a different function of lrl when using samples. Of course the operation of lrl was different than expected.
As regards the money of Carl-NC ... rather this is not the issue.
I must to remind you the proposal that made Esteban .......

Regards

Hi Geo,

I do not say you should do these things.
I said I would do these things in a hypothetical make-believe story.
The reason I said I would do these things is to answer your suggestion of looking away from conventional electronics.
You should know I will not look away from conventional electronics unless I found a real reason to do that.
So far all I hear are stories, and poorly done experiments where nobody really has very much good information about the electronics inside these PDs.
I have watched real remote metal locators work in person, and I have seen the electronics that makes them work.
It is hard for me to believe somebody discovered a new type of LRL that works on the principle of magic, and electronics no longer obey the rules that we know electronic circuits follow.

Of course, you are free to believe that magic does exist, and there is no reason why you should do any careful experiments to make sure you are right about it.
It is good enough to believe without being able know how it can work or to show it working. Then you can be happy to have a working LRL that does not find treasure.

I do not expect you to make careful tests. This is only something I would do.
And I told you I would do this so you will not expect me to believe you have a magic working PD until I see something real to convince me.

Best wishes,
J_P

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I opened a Ver-Tex. Took at least 5 days to take off all accessories. I found 3 samples (2 gold and one silver) hidden too well. If it was to deceive purchasers would they place at point that seems rather a point where not being able to see it if not dissolve the device. I believe that something secret is hidden behind the samples

Regards

Hi Geo,

Ver-Tex Receptor first appeared in 1991-1992 from Thomas Afilani, famous for manufacturing the Electroscope.
He is also famous for producing the DKL Lifeguard, which failed to work when he sent his best operator to show
how well it can detect people hiding behind crates for Sandia Laboratories. He could locate the hiding person every
time when he knew where he was hiding, but was never able to find him when he didn't know in advance where he was.
http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/acces...998/980977.pdf

We also see what kind of electronics Thomas Afilani puts inside his LRLs in many of Carl-NC reports:
http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...pe20/index.dat
http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...cope/index.dat
http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...e301/index.dat

Most of the wires are not even hooked up...!
You look at what you see, and you really believe this is a working LRL?
After we read the reports that even the factory operators cannot make it work for their customer?





Read Carl's report and see photos of what he found inside the epoxy...
http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=reports/escope20/index.dat

It's a bunch of crap...!!

Tell me how this circuit can possibly work to do anything?
Nobody is stupid enough to pay money for this after they see what is inside.
This is why Thomas Afilani hides it in epoxy...!

But maybe the Ver-Tex is different, and it has a really working circuit inside...
Can you show us the Ver-Tex circuit so we can see how it works better than the other circuits Thomas Afilani sold?


Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by goldfinder

... There is a spectrum that I discovered which I call the inertial resonance spectrum. I discovered this many years ago when I was researching the so called Molecular Frequency Discriminator and the many others who got the same information that was incorporated in the MFD and similar devices.

There is a correlation with the molecular weight and an atomic inertial or gravitational "frequency". Very good dowsers can feel this energetic resonance that actually exists between similar gold samples. Research and theoretical work by Professor Helmut Mueller and his Global Scaling equations is touching on this. When the LRL user puts a gold sample in the witness chamber there is a greater "resonance" between him/her and any gold that may be in the vicinity. None of this is standard physics, electromagnetic energies, atomic particle radiation, etc.

As you have correctly stated, "None of this is standard physics, electromagnetic energies, atomic particle radiation, etc.".
In this case, nothing more needs to be said.

Originally Posted by Götz von Berlichingen

Its "Hartmut" Müller, not "Helmut", he is not really a Professor and he used his "Global Scaling" to steal Money from naive Investors.
Do your Homework and run this Article through Google Translator, its German: http://www.esowatch.com/ge/index.php...Global_Scaling
Link for the lazy: http://translate.google.de/translate...Global_Scaling
So, how trustworthy is this "Research" ?
Its always the same: "Global Scaling" made 6 million Euro (and got sued), Steorn sells "Free Energy", some other People sell Electronic Dowsing Rods.

Very good information.
Unfortunately some people fail to learn from other people's mistakes.

Originally Posted by J_Player

Geo is not talking about a dowsing rod with a sample chamber where you put gold.
He is talking about an electronic VLF loop receiver that has a sample of gold positioned in the area of the receiver coil to cause the receiver to only beep when it is pointed at the direction where gold is buried.

This has nothing to do with dowsing.

This is true. Geo's device does not rely on the ideomotor effect to work. Perhaps something interesting is going on here, perhaps not. The problem with the experiments performed so far is their lack of scientific rigour. The results are too subjective and can easily be explained away by a skeptical observer.
Personally I find these sort of LRL experiments to be of interest. There is nothing wrong with playing around on the fringes of science, as long as you don't get carried away and forget to do a proper analysis of the results. However, if claims are made for a device with a swinging arm, then forget it ... it's an obvious dowsing rod in disguise, like the H3 Tec gizmo for example.

[Rudy]

Originally Posted by Götz von Berlichingen

Its "Hartmut" Müller, not "Helmut", he is not really a Professor and he used his "Global Scaling" to steal Money from naive Investors.
Do your Homework and run this Article through Google Translator, its German: http://www.esowatch.com/ge/index.php...Global_Scaling
Link for the lazy: http://translate.google.de/translate...Global_Scaling
So, how trustworthy is this "Research" ?

It is assuredly good enough for Dr. Hung to pounce on it and start evangelizing this as a new
pseudo scientific theory. He would probably also claim that he and his team have been working on
refining this theory and have gotten incredible results but which he can't discuss at this time.