Carl MFD article ,5KHZ frequency ?

[Carl-NC]

The Facts About NMR

A common claim with MFD proponents is that "all elements have a natural frequency" and will either resonate with other like elements, or can be made to resonate with a properly tuned signal generator. MFD proponents often point to the fact that all elements have a property called "nuclear magnetic resonance" and, therefore, the concept of resonance is entirely scientific.

Yes, it is true that all elements have an NMR frequency. You can go to WebElements and click on an element, then click the NMR link to the left side. For gold, you will find that the NMR frequency is 1.754000MHz, and that this entry includes the statement "relative to 1H = 100 (MHz)". What does this mean?

It turns out the NMR frequency for any given element is dependent on the static magnetic field the element is exposed to. For gold, the magnetic field that produces an NMR frequency of 1.754MHz is the same field that produces an NMR frequency of 100MHz for hydrogen.

What is this field? With a little effort, you will find the field strength to be roughly 2.35 Teslas. So for hydrogen, 2.35T yields an NMR frequency of 100MHz. 4.7T will result in an NMR frequency of 200MHz. In other words, the NMR frequency is proportional to the magnetic field.

What about the Earth's natural magnetic field? This varies from place-to-place, but 50 microTeslas (uT) is a fair average strength. So the magnetic field strength of 2.35T is a whopping 47,000 times stronger than the Earth's field. Working the other way, we can find that the NMR frequency of hydrogen exposed to the Earth's field is a mere 2.13kHz. And guess what? That's exactly the frequency we get from a proton precession magnetometer! Most PPM's use hydrogen-rich water as the precession medium, and it is the hydrogen that is doing the precessing. Variations in the Earth's field due to iron targets change the precession frequency, exactly because the NMR frequency varies with field strength.

So gold has an NMR frequency of 1.754MHz at 2.35T, which means at 50uT it will have an NMR frequency of only 37 Hz or so. So if any MFD were being true to the NMR property, it would use 37Hz for gold. Not 5kHz. Now, some MFD manufacturers talk about resonating elements at a harmonic (or, sometimes, a "sub-harmonic") frequency. Although 5kHz is roughly the 135th harmonic of 37Hz, it is far, far less efficient to try to resonate something at a harmonic rather than the fundamental. Anyone who has used 3rd overtone crystals is aware of this, and claiming resonance at the 135th harmonic is just plain absurd.

So now that we know what the real frequency of resonance should be, we can proceed with a gold detector, right? Not so fast. Let's go back to the proton mag. How does a PPM detect the precession frequency of water? Well, typically a small bottle of water is placed INSIDE a fairly hefty coil. The coil serves two purposes. First, water just sitting around has its molecules all randomly oriented, so that even if they were "resonating", there would be no net signal due to an overall cancelation of all the little signals. So the coil is hit with a large transient current, which generates a large magnetic field, which serves to align at least some of the water molecules. Then, with the transient field removed, the coil becomes a receiver to detect the very, very weak precession signal from the water.

So in order to utilize NMR, we need to "ping" the target to get it to precess, much like hitting a bell with a clapper. Then, we need a way to detect the precession signal, which is incredibly weak. With PPM, both of these are only accomplished when the water is INSIDE the coil. The same is true with hospital MRI machines... the patient is slid INSIDE a humongous coil.

In the end, the concept of trying to remotely resonate buried targets is just bogus. It is like trying to boil water with a microwave oven, by placing the water 100 meters from the oven, and then running the oven on a 9-volt battery. Ain't gonna happen.

- Carl

[hung]

Originally Posted by Carl-NC

The Facts About NMR

A common claim with MFD proponents is that "all elements have a natural frequency" and will either resonate with other like elements, or can be made to resonate with a properly tuned signal generator. MFD proponents often point to the fact that all elements have a property called "nuclear magnetic resonance" and, therefore, the concept of resonance is entirely scientific.

Yes, it is true that all elements have an NMR frequency. You can go to WebElements and click on an element, then click the NMR link to the left side. For gold, you will find that the NMR frequency is 1.754000MHz, and that this entry includes the statement "relative to 1H = 100 (MHz)". What does this mean?

It turns out the NMR frequency for any given element is dependent on the static magnetic field the element is exposed to. For gold, the magnetic field that produces an NMR frequency of 1.754MHz is the same field that produces an NMR frequency of 100MHz for hydrogen.

What is this field? With a little effort, you will find the field strength to be roughly 2.35 Teslas. So for hydrogen, 2.35T yields an NMR frequency of 100MHz. 4.7T will result in an NMR frequency of 200MHz. In other words, the NMR frequency is proportional to the magnetic field.

What about the Earth's natural magnetic field? This varies from place-to-place, but 50 microTeslas (uT) is a fair average strength. So the magnetic field strength of 2.35T is a whopping 47,000 times stronger than the Earth's field. Working the other way, we can find that the NMR frequency of hydrogen exposed to the Earth's field is a mere 2.13kHz. And guess what? That's exactly the frequency we get from a proton precession magnetometer! Most PPM's use hydrogen-rich water as the precession medium, and it is the hydrogen that is doing the precessing. Variations in the Earth's field due to iron targets change the precession frequency, exactly because the NMR frequency varies with field strength.

So gold has an NMR frequency of 1.754MHz at 2.35T, which means at 50uT it will have an NMR frequency of only 37 Hz or so. So if any MFD were being true to the NMR property, it would use 37Hz for gold. Not 5kHz. Now, some MFD manufacturers talk about resonating elements at a harmonic (or, sometimes, a "sub-harmonic") frequency. Although 5kHz is roughly the 135th harmonic of 37Hz, it is far, far less efficient to try to resonate something at a harmonic rather than the fundamental. Anyone who has used 3rd overtone crystals is aware of this, and claiming resonance at the 135th harmonic is just plain absurd.

So now that we know what the real frequency of resonance should be, we can proceed with a gold detector, right? Not so fast. Let's go back to the proton mag. How does a PPM detect the precession frequency of water? Well, typically a small bottle of water is placed INSIDE a fairly hefty coil. The coil serves two purposes. First, water just sitting around has its molecules all randomly oriented, so that even if they were "resonating", there would be no net signal due to an overall cancelation of all the little signals. So the coil is hit with a large transient current, which generates a large magnetic field, which serves to align at least some of the water molecules. Then, with the transient field removed, the coil becomes a receiver to detect the very, very weak precession signal from the water.

So in order to utilize NMR, we need to "ping" the target to get it to precess, much like hitting a bell with a clapper. Then, we need a way to detect the precession signal, which is incredibly weak. With PPM, both of these are only accomplished when the water is INSIDE the coil. The same is true with hospital MRI machines... the patient is slid INSIDE a humongous coil.

In the end, the concept of trying to remotely resonate buried targets is just bogus. It is like trying to boil water with a microwave oven, by placing the water 100 meters from the oven, and then running the oven on a 9-volt battery. Ain't gonna happen.

- Carl

You presented some fairly correct info above, but some of them as well as the conclusions are mostly wrong. When you mix up the equation, not surprisingly you will get wrong and incorrect results, conclusions and aproaches. I will not be discussing this here, but your explanation on MFDs are incorrect and the other assumptions above don't apply.

[Esteban]

You can find these frequencies with Larmor's frequency calculator for elements. These varies according the magnetic field applied in any substance or element. OK.

With PPM, both of these are only accomplished when the water is INSIDE the coil. The same is true with hospital MRI machines... the patient is slid INSIDE a humongous coil.

Yes, but you forgett the possibility of irradiated a kind of laser-infrared beam (modulated) and collect the information regarding each substance.

I think seriously in other kind of frequency, the based on vibration of the molecules of each element, very precisse for each.

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Yes, but you forgett the possibility of irradiated a kind of laser-infrared beam (modulated) and collect the information regarding each substance.

Hi Esteban,

Can you tell us more about these modulated irradiated laser-infrared beams?
This does not sound like magnetic resonance, but maybe magnetic resonance combined with something else?

Where do you find these beams, how can we sense them?
Do they come from buried objects, or do they come from all objects?
How strong is this beam signal?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Yes, but you forgett the possibility of irradiated a kind of laser-infrared beam (modulated) and collect the information regarding each substance.

My post addressed only the misapplication of NMR to MFD. I don't doubt that there are other ways to detect distant compositions. Ferinstance, spectroscopy is used in astronomy to analyze the composition of stars and interstellar gasses, but this method requires light transmission through the object.

I think seriously in other kind of frequency, the based on vibration of the molecules of each element, very precisse for each.

Molecular vibration is dominated by NMR. Water molecules vibrate at the NMR frequency of hydrogen. Besides, objects like gold & diamonds are not molecular compounds, but rather atomic structures that have metallic or covalent bonding structures. So claiming that their "molecules" vibrate is meaningless.

- Carl

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Carl-NC

Besides, objects like gold & diamonds are not molecular compounds, but rather atomic structures that have metallic or covalent bonding structures. So claiming that their "molecules" vibrate is meaningless.

Hi Carl,

Interesting point. I was thinking a gold atom is considered a molecule, but a molecule is defined as at least 2 atoms. So you are correct, the nuclear magnetic resonance of gold is not the same as the molecular resonance, because there is no gold molecule unless it is combined with at least one more other atom as an electrically neutral group.

This makes me wonder about carbon. In the case of diamonds, isn't there a diamond molecule which consists of quite a few carbon atoms bonded into a structure? When I look at the difference between graphite molecules and diamond molecules, it seems that maybe there is some basis to say they have distinct molecular resonant frequencies. It appears that the molecules for graphite, diamond, and several other all-carbon materials are of different size and mass, which would support the notion of different resonant frequencies.

Maybe I am missing some key information here, but the appearance is there may be a resonant frequency for diamonds, even if it is highly unlikely anybody could detect this resonance outside an extremely strong electromagnetic field.

See graphite and diamond molecules here: http://www.edinformatics.com/interac...es/diamond.htm

Best wishes,
J_P

[aft_72005]

Hi aft_72005,

Can you show where you found this formula so we can read it also?

Thank you,
J_P

Hi J_Player

The book specification:
Fundamentals of molecular spectroscopy essayby
Banwell,C.N.

In chapter seven author was wrote about spectroscopy
Of spin resonance .
I asked from my friend about molecular resonance ,he is
Chemist engineer, give me this book. I have paper
Translated from English version .
Please tell me If you found PDF format of this book.
Regards .

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by J_Player

In the case of diamonds, isn't there a diamond molecule which consists of quite a few carbon atoms bonded into a structure?

Carbon atoms can bond a number of different ways, and maybe graphite and bucky balls are considered to be all-carbon molecules. But diamond is a continuous carbon lattice.

When I look at the difference between graphite molecules and diamond molecules, it seems that maybe there is some basis to say they have distinct molecular resonant frequencies. It appears that the molecules for graphite, diamond, and several other all-carbon materials are of different size and mass, which would support the notion of different resonant frequencies.

Certainly mass and volume play a role in mechanical vibration, just like different bells and different drums produce different tones. But mechanical vibration can't be a basis for LRLs, because a silver dime and a silver dollar would have different mechanical resonances, as would diamonds of different carats.

Since I was addressing NMR and not mechanical vibration, is it possible NMR frequencies are altered by the molecular/lattice structure of the atoms? Maybe. But as you said, "it is highly unlikely anybody could detect this resonance outside an extremely strong electromagnetic field."

- Carl

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Carl

Since I was addressing NMR and not mechanical vibration, is it possible NMR frequencies are altered by the molecular/lattice structure of the atoms? Maybe. But as you said, "it is highly unlikely anybody could detect this resonance outside an extremely strong electromagnetic field."

Yes, I consider that all carbon has a tendency to create covalent bonds with itself and often with other elements. What I wonder is if the covalent bonding among the atoms of an all carbon substance would show the same NMR regardless of what all carbon substance is being tested, or if the variations in structure of the lattice would cause the frequency to be noticeably altered. It was my understanding that the NMR is dependent partly on the chemical bonding structure. But I am not certain, since you explained that water shows the resonance frequency of hydrogen. It makes me wonder if NMR testing machines are able to tell the difference between diamond and charcoal or graphite.

But as you said, I don't see how variations in NMR resonance of carbon would be relevant to MFD, or LRLs in general, as neither of these operate in a sufficient magnetic field, and are operating at the wrong frequencies based on what the manufacturers told us.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by hung

When you mix up the equation, not surprisingly you will get wrong and incorrect results, conclusions and aproaches.

Yes - perfectly true, and no-one will disagree with that!

In fact, this is admirably demonstrated by MFDs. A complete confusion of ideas and concepts...

[Rudy]

Originally Posted by hung

You presented some fairly correct info above, but some of them as well as the conclusions are mostly wrong. When you mix up the equation, not surprisingly you will get wrong and incorrect results, conclusions and aproaches. I will not be discussing this here, but your explanation on MFDs are incorrect and the other assumptions above don't apply.

I wouldn't expect anything more informative from your response. To paraphrase:


Your initial facts and information are mostly correct.
However, you are aggregating these facts incorrectly and
arrive at an incorrect conclusion.

I know why you are incorrect, but I will not explain why.

Such petulance and arrogance.

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by hung

You presented some fairly correct info above, but some of them as well as the conclusions are mostly wrong. When you mix up the equation, not surprisingly you will get wrong and incorrect results, conclusions and aproaches. I will not be discussing this here, but your explanation on MFDs are incorrect and the other assumptions above don't apply.

Eh?

I'm wrong, but you're not willing to discuss it? Do you expect anyone to take your assertion seriously?

- Carl

[Max]

Originally Posted by hung

You presented some fairly correct info above, but some of them as well as the conclusions are mostly wrong. When you mix up the equation, not surprisingly you will get wrong and incorrect results, conclusions and aproaches. I will not be discussing this here, but your explanation on MFDs are incorrect and the other assumptions above don't apply.

Hi,
Hung as always you try to disinformate people.

Carl said all scientific things/facts. Open your phisics book and read.
You need a controlled environment to do NMR, that is the NMR machine at hospital of scientific department, or the e.g. water container sorrounded by coil in e.g. a proton precession magnetometer: same thing.

In these controlled env. you know exactly what's going on, for example the intensity of magnetic field at each time and can tune/reset the machine with known samples (e.g. H2 rich compounds).

What you say here show only your ignorance about how these technology work. You probably never used or saw one in action like other people have.

Yours are just speculating.

Have no facts, lie here telling us that you use Mineoro's from a car moving:
tons of BS.
Impossible, and everybody know that.
You are a storyteller.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Thanks for the excellent explanation Carl. That pretty much tells the whole story about what is the gold NMR resonant frequency.

Your explanation also sheds some light on frequencies of other materials. I suppose if we wanted to learn the true resonant frequencies of materials like copper, lead, diamond, paper currency, semiprecious stones, etc, we would the scientists already know these frequencies and have published them in charts, which are likely to be something different than is advertised by LRL manufacturers, or frequencies generated in their circuitry.

For example, if we looked up the resonant frequency for diamond, I presume we would be looking for data on carbon NMR frequency in a 50 NT field. The question is: How would we determine if the carbon we found at this frequency is a diamond or a piece of charcoal, or part of a tree branch? Maybe we located some CO2 in exhaled air. If it were possible to sense the NMR frequency of carbon using a hand held locator in an open field, wouldn't a diamond be lost in an overwhelming amount of stray carbon found on much of the surface of the earth and in the air?

Also, it seems like it would be hard to detect anything without some high powered lab equipment. Hospital MRI machines are so powerful that they refuse to allow an MRI test on anyone who has ferrous metal fragments embedded in their body, for fear of causing injury in case the fragment was ripped loose by the intense magnetic field. Yet this field strength is necessary to make it possible to generate any kind of recognizable medical image.

This makes me wonder how a hand held device with battery power can locate the NMR of anything at distance, especially when the hand held locator is tuned to the wrong frequency.

Best wishes,
J_P

[hung]

Originally Posted by Carl-NC

The Facts About NMR

A common claim with MFD proponents is that "all elements have a natural frequency" and will either resonate with other like elements, or can be made to resonate with a properly tuned signal generator. MFD proponents often point to the fact that all elements have a property called "nuclear magnetic resonance" and, therefore, the concept of resonance is entirely scientific.

Yes, it is true that all elements have an NMR frequency. You can go to WebElements and click on an element, then click the NMR link to the left side. For gold, you will find that the NMR frequency is 1.754000MHz, and that this entry includes the statement "relative to 1H = 100 (MHz)". What does this mean?

It turns out the NMR frequency for any given element is dependent on the static magnetic field the element is exposed to. For gold, the magnetic field that produces an NMR frequency of 1.754MHz is the same field that produces an NMR frequency of 100MHz for hydrogen.

What is this field? With a little effort, you will find the field strength to be roughly 2.35 Teslas. So for hydrogen, 2.35T yields an NMR frequency of 100MHz. 4.7T will result in an NMR frequency of 200MHz. In other words, the NMR frequency is proportional to the magnetic field.

What about the Earth's natural magnetic field? This varies from place-to-place, but 50 microTeslas (uT) is a fair average strength. So the magnetic field strength of 2.35T is a whopping 47,000 times stronger than the Earth's field. Working the other way, we can find that the NMR frequency of hydrogen exposed to the Earth's field is a mere 2.13kHz. And guess what? That's exactly the frequency we get from a proton precession magnetometer! Most PPM's use hydrogen-rich water as the precession medium, and it is the hydrogen that is doing the precessing. Variations in the Earth's field due to iron targets change the precession frequency, exactly because the NMR frequency varies with field strength.

So gold has an NMR frequency of 1.754MHz at 2.35T, which means at 50uT it will have an NMR frequency of only 37 Hz or so. So if any MFD were being true to the NMR property, it would use 37Hz for gold. Not 5kHz.

Wrong.

Now, some MFD manufacturers talk about resonating elements at a harmonic (or, sometimes, a "sub-harmonic") frequency. Although 5kHz is roughly the 135th harmonic of 37Hz, it is far, far less efficient to try to resonate something at a harmonic rather than the fundamental. Anyone who has used 3rd overtone crystals is aware of this, and claiming resonance at the 135th harmonic is just plain absurd.

Partly correct. It depends on many things. But your overall conclusion does not apply.

So now that we know what the real frequency of resonance should be, we can proceed with a gold detector, right? Not so fast. Let's go back to the proton mag. How does a PPM detect the precession frequency of water? Well, typically a small bottle of water is placed INSIDE a fairly hefty coil. The coil serves two purposes. First, water just sitting around has its molecules all randomly oriented, so that even if they were "resonating", there would be no net signal due to an overall cancelation of all the little signals. So the coil is hit with a large transient current, which generates a large magnetic field, which serves to align at least some of the water molecules. Then, with the transient field removed, the coil becomes a receiver to detect the very, very weak precession signal from the water.

Incorrect comparison.

So in order to utilize NMR, we need to "ping" the target to get it to precess, much like hitting a bell with a clapper. Then, we need a way to detect the precession signal, which is incredibly weak. With PPM, both of these are only accomplished when the water is INSIDE the coil. The same is true with hospital MRI machines... the patient is slid INSIDE a humongous coil.

In the end, the concept of trying to remotely resonate buried targets is just bogus. It is like trying to boil water with a microwave oven, by placing the water 100 meters from the oven, and then running the oven on a 9-volt battery. Ain't gonna happen.

Wrong conclusion. Unfortunate comparison.

- Carl

I agree with you. As I don't want to debate this theme here, I don't have the right to state anything further to prejudice your line of thought. Keep researching.
One thing to note. It took 2 plus years to a member of this forums finally admit ionic activity in buried metals. Just like Mineoro claimed, results from work of both inventors for 50 years.
So in about 5 years, I think enough information will be gathered to permit a clearer discussion. Not talking of NMR . Talking other things.
Regards.

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by hung

One thing to note. It took 2 plus years to a member of this forums finally admit ionic activity in buried metals. Just like Mineoro claimed, results from work of both inventors for 50 years.

Just exactly who are you referring to as the member who "took 2 plus years to finally admit ionic activity in buried metals"? You aren't claiming this member is me, are you?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Originally Posted by hung

I agree with you. As I don't want to debate this theme here, I don't have the right to state anything further to prejudice your line of thought. Keep researching.
One thing to note. It took 2 plus years to a member of this forums finally admit ionic activity in buried metals. Just like Mineoro claimed, results from work of both inventors for 50 years.
So in about 5 years, I think enough information will be gathered to permit a clearer discussion. Not talking of NMR . Talking other things.
Regards.

Hi Hung,
"One thing to note. It took 2 plus years to a member of this forums finally admit ionic activity in buried metals. Just like Mineoro claimed, results from work of both inventors for 50 years."

No you said that detection was due to ions in air detected by Mineoro's devices... all we know that this is false.

There aren't airborn ions , in normal conditions, and there isn't any ion "chamber" (trap would be the right terminology) in the mineoro's ... but just a strange potted pvc pipe with brass and gold plating... nothing to detect ions ! Also many thing are related to radio-works that have nothing to do with ionic detection.

Mineoro's don't detect any ion, but just broadband noise.
Mineoro's claims are pure science-fiction.

Ionic activity of buried metals is not in discussion, there are proofs of that.
Problem is that there aren't airborn ions e.g. of gold and there isn't a device capable of really carry out LRLocation.

Your claim of using a mineoro from your car moving is a clear false assertion, impossible claim, cause of the broadband noise saturation you'll get by ignition sparks...as I've already showed here.

If you can ear sparks noise with an e.g. AM-radio why don't with the mineoro ?
Cause many parts of mineoro's pdc we can see in picture are actually things that one could find in old am-radios...same stuff... even germanium-diodes are there!

2xOA89 man ! Apart the MCU...seems designed with stuff of the 70's !

Also some Estebans claims of using e.g. an ir-led + an FM-radio as LRL detector seems go in same direction... and what a concidence !

Some ,older BFO and OFF-RES are based on beating frequencies the same you get in AM radio... and IF-mixers of FM receivers (heterodyne-style) so no big surprise for me to see such assertion by Esteban.

But you still talk of ion fantasies. You're sick !
I'm the cure.

ALL BS.

Kind regards,
Max

[hung]

Originally Posted by Max

No you said that detection was due to ions in air detected by Mineoro's devices... all we know that this is false.

No. It's not false. You don't understand the ion subject completely. That's it.

There aren't airborn ions , in normal conditions, and there isn't any ion "chamber" (trap would be the right terminology) in the mineoro's ... but just a strange potted pvc pipe with brass and gold plating... nothing to detect ions ! Also many thing are related to radio-works that have nothing to do with ionic detection.

It may not be an ionic chamber 'per se' in your own definition, but still it's an ionic chamber afterall.

Mineoro's don't detect any ion, but just broadband noise.
Mineoro's claims are pure science-fiction.~/quote]

This is not true, although broadband noise interferes. See bellow.

Sorry. You're wrong. Simply as that.

[quoteYour claim of using a mineoro from your car moving is a clear false assertion, impossible claim, cause of the broadband noise saturation you'll get by ignition sparks...as I've already showed here.

You get interference only if you point it to the source of ignition, otherwise, not. It's directional. You have to keep it 90 deg from source to avoid interferences.
In fact I already detected targets from car dozens of times. The gold vein was detected this way last week.

If you can ear sparks noise with an e.g. AM-radio why don't with the mineoro ?

The Mineoro also receive those. Far away lightinings from storms too.

Cause many parts of mineoro's pdc we can see in picture are actually things that one could find in old am-radios...same stuff... even germanium-diodes are there!

First, what is shown is not the PDC. It's a model which served as link to the FG80. But it works (or at least it used to).

But you still talk of ion fantasies.

Maybe fantasies for you. But to me, this 'fantasies' turn into profit of the objects I find.

You're sick !

Thanks.

I'm the cure.

Not really...

Today is my day off. That's why I'm here having fun just for a while...

Kind regards,
Max

Kind feelings to you too.

[Max]

Originally Posted by hung

No. It's not false. You don't understand the ion subject completely. That's it.



It may not be an ionic chamber 'per se' in your own definition, but still it's an ionic chamber afterall.



You get interference only if you point it to the source of ignition, otherwise, not. It's directional. You have to keep it 90 deg from source to avoid interferences.
In fact I already detected targets from car dozens of times. The gold vein was detected this way last week.



The Mineoro also receive those. Far away lightinings from storms too.



First, what is shown is not the PDC. It's a model which served as link to the FG80. But it works (or at least it used to).




Maybe fantasies for you. But to me, this 'fantasies' turn into profit of the objects I find.



Thanks.


Not really...

Today is my day off. That's why I'm here having fun just for a while...



Kind feelings to you too.

Hi,
"It may not be an ionic chamber 'per se' in your own definition, but still it's an ionic chamber afterall."

This is new ! it's a ionic chamber "afterall"...oh wow ! now I'm really lost in space ! Is it a ionic chamber or not !? There isn't a middle way !

"You get interference only if you point it to the source of ignition, otherwise, not. It's directional. You have to keep it 90 deg from source to avoid interferences. "

This is false. You condradict yourself with this assertion, cause you many times reported that the unit must be used following the "reflected" signal, using the famous angles Esteban and all the other nonscientists talk about to locate the target, so you said before, indirectly, that unit isn't directional.

"You have to keep it 90 deg from source to avoid interferences. "

This is absolutely impossible using your hand, mineoro and a car.
Even assuming the unit totally directional is IMPOSSIBLE holding the mineoro at exact 90degrees angle position respect the noise source.

BS.

In the car the broadband noise due to the sparks and the strong magnetic field related create eddy-currents that run in the metallic surfaces at engine, then propagate on surface of metallic parts of the whole car, thus creating a noisy environment. The huge transients generate noise also in the electrical paths in the whole car... as any car-audio entusiast well know.

Not only... a huge amount of pure RF noise is generated by the sparks themselves... without any need of other coupling to saturate any mineoro or the like.

Mineoro's can't be used in a car with engine running. You'll ear only noise from the engine. It's a fact.

All people experimented with mineoro reported that units are really prone to electrical noise, from e.g. tv-set, power-lines, ionizers... all cause of broadband omnidirectional receiver they really are. Same happens with the zahori I've tested... just as another coincidence !

Using Mineoro's from a car with engine on = fantasies.

"The Mineoro also receive those. Far away lightinings from storms too."

Here we are... ! And all other noise too.

"First, what is shown is not the PDC. It's a model which served as link to the FG80. But it works (or at least it used to). "

Was PDC, read the label and Mineoro's logo on the internal !

Also you need googles ???

What else ???

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

labeled cdm-210 outside... but then the SECRET POTTED CIRCUIT said PDC!

I think that change absolutely nothing! For me are all the same thing.

Nonsense , nonworking devices.

I'm the cure !

[hung]

Originally Posted by Max

Hi,
In the car the broadband noise due to the sparks and the strong magnetic field related create eddy-currents that run in the metallic surfaces at engine, then propagate on surface of metallic parts of the whole car, thus creating a noisy environment. The huge transients generate noise also in the electrical paths in the whole car... as any car-audio entusiast well know.

Max

C'mon Max, you're smarter than that.
Sure the PDC will beep as soon as you turn the engine on. In my own car it even captures the electronic signals to the car's computer some seconds after the engine on. But after that, it remains silent as expected. I use it positioned over the right seat's window base, pointing outside. If the deivce is turned to point the car's coil for instance it will beep for sure.
You will confirm that with any Mineoro user. Even Carl.
If it worked as you claim above it would be uselless to work in a car and even useless as gold detector. Get real.

As for the PDC, you said it all yourself... 'It's the CDM-210', not the PDC210. Go back to that thread and find the explanation Damasio gave regarding this model.

Well, case closed for me on both subjects.

[hung]

Hey Esteban,

I see you are a patient person. Congratulations. I'm not.

[Max]

Originally Posted by hung

C'mon Max, you're smarter than that.
Sure the PDC will beep as soon as you turn the engine on. In my own car it even captures the electronic signals to the car's computer some seconds after the engine on. But after that, it remains silent as expected. I use it positioned over the right seat's window base, pointing outside. If the deivce is turned to point the car's coil for instance it will beep for sure.
You will confirm that with any Mineoro user. Even Carl.
If it worked as you claim above it would be uselless to work in a car and even useless as gold detector. Get real.

As for the PDC, you said it all yourself... 'It's the CDM-210', not the PDC210. Go back to that thread and find the explanation Damasio gave regarding this model.

Well, case closed for me on both subjects.

Hi Hung,
you continue with nonsense... good.

These things cannot be used in cars with engine on. You intentionally disinformate people. I'm not an owner of mineoro's devices but I'm sure some serious people having it will confirm that.

I have no interest saying that can't be used in such conditions cause of any problems with you or mineoro: just to serve the truth. Nothing more.

I've not bought a mineoro or other LRL stuff... I'm not a competitor... and just speak about facts.

Then you can use it aware of your car as you want... if you belive it works.
Fine for me.
But please don't say here to others things that aren't so.

You knows perfectly that in a car with engine on the mineoro's and many other claimed working LRL cannot be turned on.

"If it worked as you claim above it would be uselless to work in a car and even useless as gold detector. Get real."

I'm real. Actually IT IS USELESS.

"As for the PDC, you said it all yourself... 'It's the CDM-210', not the PDC210."

Change nothing. The unit was manifactured by Mineoro and claimed working LRL... so what difference if you call it John or Mary ?

3 letters are the difference ? Alexis explained that is a total CRAP. Can't detect anything but noise... then dismantled it to show us what's inside...
and we saw the PVC water-pipe... the one you still claim being a "ion chamber".

ALL BS.

Kind regards,
Max

[Esteban]

One more time, metals emit infrared. Sure.

... well-painted metals. Unoxidized bare metals have emissivities below about 0.3 and should not be measured. Oxidized metals have emissivities ranging from about 0.5 to 0.9, and are the problematic category due to the large range of values. The degree of oxidation is a key ingredient to an object’s emissivity. The higher the oxidation, the higher the emissivity.


What coincidence! No?


More:

Objects generally emit infrared radiation across a spectrum of wavelengths, but only a specific region of the spectrum is of interest because sensors are usually designed only to collect radiation within a specific bandwidth. As a result, the infrared band is often subdivided into smaller sections. There are no standard divisions, but a commonly used scheme is...:

And tons and tons....

Is easy to find info in the net about IR emission of metals, wich deppends also of his termal conductivity.

You're not prepared for to discuss this: first, because you no investigate, you believe you know about the things, but no. And second and more important: you never experiment in it, except when you press a button of your TV remote control.

And more Max: no need high energies, no high energies IR sources, simple IR leds or laser leds do the job.

AND MORE: I have the key of it!

You're the cure, Medice cure te ipsum!

[Esteban]

Also gold forms molecular structures, 13, 14, 19, etc., atoms, for example. As molecules vibrates, also atoms vibrates in singular signature for each element.

Type in the net gold molecules and you will find info.