|
|
#51
03-26-2011, 09:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
J_P so we are on the same page. The spike you see on the computer for H is found using the earths field. The strong field that is turned on for a few seconds is only to cause the H protons to tilt. It's when this field is turned off and the H protons return to the earths field is the frequency read. So in the earths field H Protons @ 50nt should be around 2128 or so. This is what proton mags are calibrated to. look on page 9.
http://perso.infonie.be/j.g.delannoy...Technology.pdf This is what I said. "Correct! But MFD uses the frequencies in the earth field that is in the audio range. That is all I am saying."
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging! 
|
|
#52
03-26-2011, 09:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi J_P.
I can say that the MFD frequency varies from person to person. For example I have a good response to the gold at 4814 Hz. I know many people who use MFD and use for the gold frequencies from 4500 until 5500. In every person there is a frequency that suits more. Regards 
__________________
Geo
|
|
#53
03-26-2011, 09:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Of course that is correct. And we see it is impossible to find the reading if we don't first turn on the super strong field in order to cause the imbalance in the internal atomic resonance forces. This super strong field is what removes the opposite atomic forces, that make this precession signal visible at the moment we remove the field. When we do not begin with a field stronger than the earth's field, the imbalance of opposing resonant forces is so small that the noise is many times stronger. This raises some questions about people who claim to locate distant substances using NMR frequencies. And there is the nagging problem that the earth's field is not uniform... look at page 7 which shows the variations in the earth's field in a small area. What that map does not show is the micro variations that also happen. And it does not have a larger scale map to show how far off a given spot of ground is different from the field strength value you looked up on the daily report for your location. The fact is that any value we look up in the daily reports is only an interpolation of what was measured between magnetometer stations, not a real measurement that was taken at your spot. If you actually measure the magnetic field, you will find a lot of variations like you see in the chart page 7. But the main problem I see is nobody who claims to find things with MFD methods even bothers to measure the field. I can't imagine they could have their oscillators set for the actual NMR frequency for materials nearby them. This fact, along with the fact they are not using a strong field to initiate the precession which makes the NMR measurable makes me think MFD does not use NMR frequencies, regardless of what MFD users think. We then see Geo reports a frequency far different, and I read his posts where he reported an oscillator at MHz range also works for him. This is why I wonder if you happen to know anything about what Mike(Mont) claims you said? Quote:
J_P
|
|
#54
03-26-2011, 09:55 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think He means I said MFD has nothing to do with MRI. I think I told Jim that or someone.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#55
03-26-2011, 11:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
MFD does not produce an image of soft tissues from people who were placed inside a giant magnetic coil. Nor does it involve any strong magnetic fields at all. So what about the claims of using NMR frequencies, considering the near impossibility that MFD users could be at the correct NMR frequency for the time of day at their location? How can we attribute any claims of finding something buried to having an oscillator tuned to the NMR frequency, when it is highly unlikely they are tuned to a NMR frequency? Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#56
03-26-2011, 11:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well that silver I dowse I used NMR frequencies. I didn't do too bad.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#57
03-27-2011, 11:24 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It appears you are saying the fact you find silver confirms you are tuned to the correct NMR frequency of silver. This logic might seem reasonable if we hadn't just read a lot of facts published by scientists who say the NMR frequency depends on the magnetic field strength where the sample is located. For example, look at the different field strengths reported by NOAA at different locations around the world today, and the NMR frequency we find when we use Mike(Mont)'s formula: 45,745.0 nT = 34.143 Hz = Athens, Greece 23,277.5 nT = 17.374 Hz = Rio De Janiero, Brazil 43,737.0 nT = 32.645 Hz = Lisbon, Portugal 61,540.3 nT = 45.933 Hz = Tura, Russia 47,470.2 nT = 35.431 Hz = Los Angeles, USA You can see the field strength and the NMR frequency is different for every place I listed. I presume you looked up the daily magnetic field strength where you are located on the days you searched for silver in order to calculate the NMR frequency. NOAA Daily reports are not good enough to find the NMR frequency in an earth field The problem is NOAA data does not show the magnetic field strength for the exact spot where you are treasure hunting. These are daily averages for your area which were interpolated from various magnetometer stations some distance from you. There are many local anomalies of substantial proportions which are averaged in order to make these daily reports. It is very unlikely the daily average you saw published is the same as the actual field strength where you were standing. Most of the geological magnetometer surveys I have seen show the earth's magnetic field is far from a uniform field. Most surveys show magnetic variations that change the NMR frequency substantially within a space the size of a soccer field. The published NOAA average field strength for your area is probably far different than the actual field strength where you are standing. It is probably enough different that you cannot possibly calculate the correct NMR frequency. NOAA does not catch 5000 nT anomalies in a small field, or even in a big field For example, the image below shows a magnetometer survey in newfoundland with a magnetic field variation between 52000 nT and 67000 nT within a distance of about 100 meters (328 feet). This amount of variation in magnetic field strength means the NMR frequency of hydrogen changes from 2213.72 Hz to 2742.59 Hz when you walk 328 feet! In other areas of the survey, we see a more uniform field. But we have no way to know if the NOAA reported field strength is the same as even the areas of uniform field unless we measure the field with a magnetometer. Let's see what NOAA has to report about the two corners of that soccer field sized area today: NOAA reports for the lower left corner : 58°00'20" W 48°31'40" N = 53,567.0 nT NOAA reports at the upper right corner: 58°00'15" W 48°31'44" N = 53,567.1 nT They show the two corners to be 0.1 nT difference... not the 5000 nT difference that the geological survey measured. Was NOAA wrong, or was the magnetic survey company wrong? We expect the absolute field value is different today than when the magnetometer survey was made, but the 5000 nT variation across the two corners of this field does not change. We should still find somewhere close to 5000 nT difference, but NOAA is reporting 0.1 nT difference, or essentially the same field strength. We know NOAA did not report the true field strength, and we know the NOAA report does not give us a usable measurement to calculate the NMR frequency. How can the NOAA report be wrong? Because there are so many variations in the earth's magnetic field, NOAA only publishes the interpolated averages for an area that do not show these variations we could measure. Thus the NOAA daily report for this location is only the average for a large area of the map, with no indication of what the actual field strength is at any area the size of a soccer field. In fact we cannot even expect the areas of uniform field strength to be accurately reported for this map, because the NOAA interpolation is for a larger area than we would normally search on this map. The only way to calculate the NMR of an element on the ground is to begin with the actual magnetic field first The point is the only way you can know the NMR frequency where you are standing is to measure the field strength with a calibrated magnetometer like a geologist does. Unless you measured the magnetic field strength with a magnetometer before making your frequency calculation, it is highly unlikely your oscillator was set to the actual NMR frequency. Did NMR find your silver, or was it something else? This raises serious questions about what NMR frequency you were using with your oscillator. In other words... Did you measure the field strength where you are standing with a calibrated magnetometer before you calculated what frequency to set your oscillator? Or did you use the NOAA interpolated field strength in your area to calculate the NMR frequency? If you were finding silver, then I would think we cannot attribute the silver finds to an oscillator resonating at the NMR frequency. If you really did have exceptionally good silver recovery results, I suspect the results must be attributed to a different cause than NMR frequency. My question is: How certain are you that your oscillator was set to the actual NMR frequency of silver when you were finding silver? Best wishes, J_P --------------- P.S. Take a look at the image below from this website: http://triplenineresources.com/proje...ation-updates/ and http://triplenineresources.com/wp-co...10/10/MAG2.jpg You cans see the large variation in the earth's field when you walk across the length of a soccer field. But if you check another location in the map, you can find areas that have fairly uniform field strength. The problem with the NOAA daily report is the value they report is about 53560 nT (within 20 or 30 nT) for everywhere on this map. you could not possibly find the correct NMR frequency when using thier reported value. other interesting links: http://loganresources.blogspot.com/2...air-photo.html http://www.haranga.com/Selenge.html http://www.anglocanex.com/s/NewsRele...-Gold-Property
|
|
#58
03-27-2011, 08:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
J_P in dowsing the frequency is not that exact. In other words if I'm set to 38.2 hz for gold I will still hit that target +-1 hz. The plot you show above is not a normal area. this is a plot showing high mineral content. Possible gold silver or whatever vein running through that area and causing the earths field to change as you see it. As far as using NMR frequencies I set to the area I'm hunting. Lets say Ag @ 47000 nt is 80.99 hz. At 47010.5 it's not changed much but to 81.0. In my area the most it changes is about .1 hz from day to day.
I use my Iphone with an on-board 3 axis mag to check total nt. If I was in that area in the plot it would be a red flag that I'm standing in a large anomaly. As far as map dowsing goes I can only hit targets that were in the picture at the time it was taken. So for that silver lamp I set for the field nt according to the day of the photo. Elevation also comes in to play. Problem is, none of this makes sense to science. I'll be the first to agree with that. But! Many are using dowsing and locating just find. It's a big part of my hunt. Just saying. There are people today that have developed electronic sensing and are working with mining companies and are staying very busy. If this forum want to try a little test I will post 2 NMR compound frequencies of their choice. I will give the NMR field strength to use for mikes calculation. So anyone can try the frequency if they have a rod and a sine wave generator. It can be an drug or mineral type or whatever. Of course all should have access to the same target. So lets think of that. TIm
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#59
03-28-2011, 12:26 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
What you are saying is when dowsing, you no longer need the precision of NMR methods, and that none of it makes sense to science. I can agree that none of it makes sense to science. This is why I am only addressing the one part that does make sense, ie: the NMR frequency of an element and how to determine it. What causes magnetic gradients in the ground? To start, the tiny area of the map I showed has a larger magnetic gradient than other areas of the map. We can expect the NOAA report will not catch this high gradient in their interpolated values. However, this is not an abnormal area that was mapped. Most magnetic surveys I have seen show gradients which are similar even when they are not in a mining area. In most magnetic survey maps that span several miles we find areas where there are large gradients and small gradients. These gradients are not caused by silver or gold veins. They are caused by folds and faults, or other geological movements of the earth which concentrate minerals that are more magnetic or diamatic. In addition to the folds and faults, there are also other geological forces such as erosion, glaciers, and volcanos which move earth materials that can alter magnetic fields. Even sediments and overburdon can contain pockets of materials that concentrate magnetic fields. Gold and silver metal or ore veins do not contribute substantially to these variations in the magnetic field. But magnetic sands, rocks and even foriegn objects located at or under the surface do. The places where you find large anomalies are places where the earth has moved and shifted the position of the materials that can focus a magnetic field. If gold or silver ores or treasure items happen to be in these places, then their presence does not have any direct influence on the magnetic field gradient. Let's see what happens outside the strong gradient area: We know the strong gradient I showed over a 100 meter span could be hard for NOAA to catch in their interpolated reading for the area. But what about the parts of that map that do not have a large gradient? Suppose we check the NOAA report for the large blue area at the bottom, and the center of the large purple area in the center. We can see these two areas are about two miles (3 Km) away from each other. Let's see what the NOAA reports for field strength in these areas that do not have a large gradient (see image below). NOAA reports the lower blue area to have a field of 52708 nT, while the survey measured to be 57000 nT. This means that the NOAA data for today is coincidentally the same as the magnetic survey crew measured back at the time when the survey was done. This is good for a base reference so we can see if we find the same relative field strength in other low-gradient areas of the map. Now, lets take a look at the dark purple area in the center... NOAA reports a field of 52721 nT in the center of the purple where there is no strong gradient. But the survey crew measured 57000 nT. NOAA is off by 4300 nT!  This is not a heavy gradient area. It is the center of a large uniform area over a mile long. We see the resolution of the NOAA interpolation does not include this particular location. So we can be walking along the purple area for a mile or so and have no idea that we are using the wrong NMR frequency calculated from the NOAA report. How far off are we? We set our oscillator to 39.4 Hz after we check the NOAA magnetic field value and made a calculation. But if we take the actual measured magnetic field value, we find the actual NMR frequency is 42.5 Hz. There is no way we can pretend these two frequencies are about the same. What further complicates the error is the magnetic field changes during the day. And NOAA does not give us updates throughout the day every time the field changes strength. We see the frequencies calculated from the NOAA reports are highly unlikely to give the correct values unless we are lucky enough to be standing in a patch of ground which has the same value at the moment as was published by NOAA. And our Ipod did not tell us we are in a heavy magnetic field gradient. There are many areas like the purple area I showed on the map. Your own area has many places with a flat gradient that NOAA does not interpolate near the correct value. And the Ipod shows us the magnetic gradient is fairly even, so we are walking along thinking everything is ok. As we leisurly stroll past the four buried treasure chests from the 1852 bank robbery, we are not disturbed by the chests with the 40 pounds of gold about 5 feet below where we are walking.  According to the NMR knowledge that makes sense, we could determine a person using MFD does not have his oscillator set to the NMR frequency except on rare occasions when he happened to set it at the correct frequency by chance. The calculations a person might make could bring him somewhere close to the NMR frequency, but not likely at the correct frequency. At this point we can conclude that MFD is not related to NMR because MFD oscillators are not tuned to NMR frequencies, and because a low voltage oscillator does not resonate with distant atoms at a different frequency. Or we could look further into the part of MFD that doesn't make any sense. According to the nonsense part of MFD, an Ipod is good enough to measure the magnetic field strength because precision is not important for NMR. 32 Hz give or take 1Hz works fine. If this is the case, then of course, there is no reason to know the magnetic field strength any more precisely than an Ipod or a cheap magnetometer with a solid state fluxgate chip will indicate. Of course, since it makes no sense, we can't expect people who understand the dynamics of NMR to believe MFD is utilizing these dynamics. But we are taking an excursion into nonsense, with the hope that by the end of the tour we may find some sense in it. Even though MFD does not make any sense as you say, there is always a final way to break through the barrier of disbelief... The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. I propose we try your experiment and see if anyone finds any response for the frequencies you suggest. Let's all of us who are interested try it out and see if it really works to connect a 5v oscillator to L-Rods. Why not tell us exactly how to build the rods (size and construction details), and give us a circuit diagram for an oscillator you consider suitable to connect. Be sure to show how to connect the oscillator and any grounds. Also instructions for how to use the rods, and what they are supposed to do to indicate the target material. If we see some results, then we will have a reason to figure out some real explanation how it is happening. Best wishes, J_P ---------------- See illustration of how NOAA does not tell you the exact magnetic field strength where you are standing. It only interpolates the general value for a large area.
|
|
#60
03-28-2011, 12:47 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
JP you need to pick an area you are going to hunt and set for that area! I agree NOAA has different readings. I guess the science they are using is flawed! As I said I always check my mag and adjust accordingly.
For those who want to test will need a generator that has .1hz increments and sine wave. They will have to make a coil also. Using a spool of speaker wire 16ga. 100ft attach one end to the generator output and the other end split to about 2 ft and solder to brass rods to insert into the ground.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#62
03-28-2011, 02:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The coil size does not matter. The wire is on the spool. One end is connected to the signal generator and the other 2 ends connected to rods that you insert into the ground. You use the soil to limit the current through the coil.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#63
03-28-2011, 09:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Do you mean 2 starts (bridged in one) connected to the signal generator and the other 2 ends connected to rods that you insert into the ground. [/quote]
__________________
Geo
|
|
#64
03-29-2011, 01:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Take one end of the 2 conductor wire and connect it to the generator. Take the other end and solder to 2 rods. I will post a picture tomorrow.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#65
03-29-2011, 06:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
.Who is the distance between the 2 rods??? Also... what about the common of the generator??? The idea of picture is very good Regards
__________________
Geo
|
|
#66
03-29-2011, 11:14 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Look at this photo. It's a coil of 16ga speaker wire with 2 brass rods. Sorry about the size.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#68
03-30-2011, 02:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
 Try this.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#70
12-27-2011, 03:39 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What is the NMR for gold and silver and copper?
After reading above, we discovered that the nuclear magnetic frequency for different elements depends on how strong the magnetic field they are in. So the NMR frequency will change if the magnetic field is changed. scientists usually measure the NMR frequency in the MHz range after they put an element in a very strong magnetic field. They do this because it is nearly impossible to measure a NMR frequency in the natural field of the earth. They find the natural earth field is constantly changing, and it is different at every location on the earth. But let us suppose we wanted to know how to find the NMR frequency of metals at the surface of the earth. How would you find the frequency? You must start by measuring the strength of the earth's magnetic field at the place where the metal is located. You will measure a magnetic field which is somewhere between 22,000 nT and 68,000 nT. After you have this measurement for the magnetic field, you can use the formulas at the bottom of the image below to find the NMR frequency for gold, silver, coppper and aluminum. You can see there is a formula to calculate the gold NMR. But the silver NMR frequency has two formulas. This is because there are two isotopes of silver which are found in equal amounts for all the silver on earth. This means that any silver will have two NMR frequencies which you can calculate by using the two formulas below. Either of these frequencies will identify silver. We see the same for copper. It has two isotopes and two frequencies. For copper, the 63 isotope is 70% of all the copper on earth, and the 65 isotope is 30% of the copper on earth. For copper, you are better to use the 63 isotope because there is more of it in the copper you find. Another interesting property of these four metals it they have different receptivity values. The receptivity is the tendency of an element to precess, or to react to the magnetic field and produce a NMR frequency. If we consider carbon to be a standard to measure other elements against, we find that other elements will precess more easily, or less easily than carbon. Gold has only 1/6 the tendency as carbon to precess. So we say gold has a receptivity of 0.158. This means that it we can see carbon precessing and showing us NMR frequencies 6 times stronger than gold does. Here are the receptivity values for gold, silver, copper and aluminum: 0.158 Gold 197 0.200 Silver 107 0.282 Silver 109 371.0 Copper 63 202.0 Copper 65 1220.0 Aluminum 27 we can see gold and silver have a very weak ability to precess compared to copper or aluminum. The precession strength of aluminum is 4000-7000 stronger than silver or gold. And copper has a precession strength 1300-2300 times stronger than silver or gold. This means that if you were able to detect the NMR of any of these metals in an earth field, then aluminum would have the strongest amount of precession and NMR signals which are thousands of times stronger than silver or gold. This leads me to believe that MFD methods are not detecting the NMR frequency of these metals. Because MFD methods do not detect aluminum with a signal thousands of times stronger than for silver or gold, I would think MFD is detecting something different than the NMR frequencies for these elements. But in case I am wrong about this, you can use the formulas below to calculate the NMR frequencies. Be careful with the chart. This chart shows only the average magnetic field strength and the average NMR frequency found on Dec 21, 2011 in the general areas of the locations listed. The actual frequency varies because the magnetic field you will measure in any of those locations is not the average value shown. As an example, the NMR frequency of gold in Los Angeles can be measured to be between 22Hz and 41Hz depending on where in Los Angeles you are measuring it. See the magnetic field map here to see how the NMR frequency can change by 10% at different locations inside a soccer field: http://www.longrangelocators.com/for...86#post=125686 The only way you can know the actual NMR frequency is to measure the magnetic field where the metal is located, then calculate the frequency with the formulas below. Best wishes, J_P
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
