|
|
#651
11-17-2011, 02:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
But even the hungcorp UV LEDs are too expensive for me. Engineers in the secret bunker have been experimenting with single-sideband non-modulated light beams, and they discovered an ordinary red LED can discriminate the difference between dental gold and jewelry gold if gold from a tooth filling is placed in the sample chamber to be ionized by charging it with 5 volt pulses. How the non-modulated light discriminates is a single-sideband secret. But it does not matter because red LEDs cost less than 0.01 eu. One important tip is you must use a lens to make the red LED to focus into a beam. Or you could use a red laser pointer which is already a good beam. But the red laser pointer cost more than 0.01 eu, so better to use the red LED. You can see it is no longer necessary to spend 19999,99 £ or 19999,99 BRL for the green UV-A LED. Good luck with your treasure hunting, J_P 
|
|
#654
11-17-2011, 05:09 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
These are just harmless jokes Geo. And version of Zahori I posted above is clearly serious circuit. How with your PD project are there some progress?
__________________
Global capital is ruining your life? You have right to self-defence!
|
|
#656
11-17-2011, 10:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
HH Rudy, MXT, HeadHunter Wader Do or do not. There is no try. Yoda
|
|
#657
11-17-2011, 11:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Until I read some science books that say you need to have some modulation in order for a carrier wave to work for sending signals. But then we are talking about non modulated light beams carriers... not strictly considered RF, so the rules change due to relativity effects on the subatomic level. Conclusion: Upper or lower sideband cannot be determined without secret light carrier SSB explanation. The best we can do is to make a wild guess. Best wishes, J_P p.s. After reading science websites, I concluded the sideband must be either a UV sideband or a NIR sideband. Do you think I got it right? If so, I hope the UV or NIR LEDs come in red or green so they are easy to see where we are pointing the beam.
|
|
#658
11-18-2011, 01:39 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think you have it wrong. This is the thread Estaban started when he wanted to talk about the Zahori circuit. Esteban's thread was destroyed long ago when LRL experimenters decided they don't like his Zahori circuit and want to change the thread to the charge detector thread. We see that The Zahori is a charge detector which has a special digital filter which discharges the antenna at 50 or 60 Hz to help stability. The Zahori is not a simple static charge detector. The Zahori is different because it has the added digital 50-60 Hz filter. Esteban and Carlos originally talked about this circuit in 2002 http://geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6664 Then Esteban posted the Zahori schematic in 2005 here http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10601 Then Esteban posted the Zahori a third time in Ivconic's negative ion detector thread here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...864#post=40864 But Esteban knew the Zahori is not a simple air charge detector because it has the 50/60 Hz discharging filter added to the circuit. He wanted a special thread for only this Zahori circuit so he could explain how the 50/60 filter works and details of this circuit. He did not want to confuse this Zahori circuit with the static charge circuits he saw in Ivconic's ion detector thread which did not have the 50/60 Hz filter. So he started this new Zahori thread here for only the Zahori and not the other static charge detectors that I posted in Ivconic's thread. This Zahori thread became a very good thread where people can learn about the Zahori circuit. But then some LRL experimenters decided they don't like Esteban's Zahori and they want to change his Zahori back to the circuit which I made for the Ivconic static charge detecting. You can find where I first posted this circuit here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...405#post=41405 Morgan calls my circuit the "Mini Zahori" when he connects his antenna to it. But I can tell you it is not called Mini Zahori or any kind of Zahori. I know because I am the designer of this circuit..! My charge detector circuit is based on a simple static detector and negative ion detector by Andy Collinson here: http://www.zen22142.zen.co.uk/Circui.../staticdet.htm I never added a digital filter for 50/60 Hz to make it into a Zahori detector. I only added a versatile audio amplifier to replace Andy's meter, and connected it to Ivconic's antenna. I would never call this a Zahori because it has no digital discharging filter that we find in the Zahori. But now Experimenters make a joke with my circuit and name it "Mini Zahori". I begin to wonder why they are making this joke. I wonder why they don't make their posts about this circuit in the ion detector thread where they found it instead of in Esteban's thread for the Zahori. I wonder why they don't call my circuit by its correct name as the "charge detector" instead of pretending it is a zahori circuit. If we read the thread from the beginning, then we see the reason. It is because they don't like Esteban's Zahori discussion. They want to change to discussion of my circuit and stop the talk of true Zahori circuit. You can see for yourself here http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...749#post=88749 Where my charge detector circuit is called Mini Zahory if an "ionic chamber" is added. But adding chambers or samples does not change my circuit into any form of the Zahori circuit. Not unless a 50/60 Hz filter is added to the sensing circuit. Esteban quickly tries to get back to the Zahori circuit which he wanted to talk about when he shows more details to the true Zahori here and below: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...930#post=88930 But my electric charge detector circuit comes back again here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...61#post=122861 And it continues to be called a "mini zahori" when it is connected to an antenna with a sample in it. But we see there is no 50/60 Hz filter circuit in this detector - no Zahori circuit at all. For me, I do not care if people want to call my circuit Zahori or not. I can play games same as the people who do not like Esteban's Zahori circuit. But the difference is I do like his Zahori circuit. And I can see very well that the Zahori has the digital filter in it, which makes it as a Zahori, and not a plain charge detector. Esteban knew this too. You can see the two circuits Esteban posted were both using 50/60 Hz filters -- See below: When I see the LRL experimenters do not like to talk about the Zahori circuit in the Zahori thread, then I think it is ok to make parodies... My purpose is not to destroy Esteban's thread about the Zahori circuit -- his Zahori discussion was already destroyed long ago by LRL experimenters who did not like it. My reason to make parodies is to protest against the continuing attempts to hijack Esteban's serious discussion of his 50/60 Hz filtered Zahori project. The only question I have is: why didn't people make posts about this charge detector and other ion detectors in the thread that we started for these? Why don't we see these charge detector circuits in the Ivconic's ion detector thread instead of in Esteban's Zahori thread? Why hijack Esteban's attempt to discuss the Zahori circuit? Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#659
11-18-2011, 07:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Realy i don't know Regards
__________________
Geo
|
|
#660
11-18-2011, 10:31 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi dear J_Player,
Thanks for your post and design ... if you like please start a new post for introduce your static charge detector and give me us to share our knowledge to improve it ... ok ? did you think by this device we can detect gold treasures ?
__________________
"GOD BLESS YOU"
|
|
#661
11-18-2011, 12:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
My static charge detector was already introduced here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...864#post=40864 There is no need to introduce it a second time. It was an experiment I added to the charge detector which Ivconic designed and built here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...864#post=40864 If you read all of that thread you will find the Ivconic charge detector is much more sophisticated than my design. You will see that the Ivconic circuit is described in detail so that anybody can make this sophisticated charge sensor. I made my design only to make a more simple version that would detect the same charge in the air, but maybe not as sensitive. I did eventually build this circuit on a proto board and it was working after minor tweaks to the component values. I found it would detect charges in the air as I expected. But I did not find any buried treasures with it. You can read a lot more about this in the thread that I linked above. Read what people found with the Ivconic detector - My design performed the same, except not as sensitive as the Ivconic detector. You can read my summary of the Ivconic ion detector performance here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...15#post=125115 And you can read many tips for building and making improvements to the Ivconic detector. But people did not want to continue posting improvements to the Ivconic detector or to my circuit there. They posted their improvements here in the Zahori discussion instead. We see the only improvement to my circuit which is claimed to find treasure is done by changing the antenna, not by changing the circuit. So if you want to learn the details of my circuit or the Ivconic circuit, You can go here and read: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...864#post=40864 But if you want to learn about the Zahori circuit, you will find it is another more sophisticated circuit than what I designed. I immediately recognized the improvements in the design of the Zahori circuit. But it was not until I received an email from an EE that I saw that with some modifications, the zahori has much more potential for studying the signals received by dividing them in time domains. This zahori circuit design concept proved to be instrumental in developing some circuitry which was later used for observing some very strange small signals which are believed to be associated with long range detection. I have already hinted about this kind of use for the zahori several times in this forum. But then I do not claim the zahori can find treasure, nor do I claim that my charge detector circuit can find treasure. It is other people who make those claims. Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#663
11-18-2011, 02:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I see more than one complete LRL circuit in the remote sensing forum. I see a circuit by Ivconic, by me, and several by Dr. Best who is rumored to be skeptic, as well as several by WM6. We also see Qiaozhi's Avramenko’s fork LRL http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...945#post=39945 And several LRL circuits given by Carl-NC here: http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...mfd1/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...rado/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...r800/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...pe20/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...e301/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...cope/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...ls50/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...iner/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...cope/index.dat http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page.../me2/index.dat But I also see one complete LRL circuit is given by Esteban here, which is the Zahori: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/attac...1&d=1150380983 and another variation here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/attac...1&d=1148432640 I don't see any other complete LRL circuits given by LRL builders. Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#664
11-18-2011, 02:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Interesting! So Morgan which one of these circuits is working? Which one are you getting calls claiming they found gold? I don't mind building and testing, but I don't want to waste my time either.
I've been building and using LRL type systems since 1985 and I'm yet to find a instrument to detect the anomaly. Ideo is the feedback in dowsing using any rod system. But if what you claim is true, that a static field surrounds a long time buried target, this should be easy to detect. I have found silver coins and rings. Some gold. But nothing big yet using my system. Maybe a new thread with the correct circuit should be started so everyone is on track. TIm
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging! 
Last edited by Tim Williams; 11-18-2011 at 02:25 PM. Reason: add more
|
|
#665
11-18-2011, 02:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
ES2 ,9 on esteban circuit go?
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#666
11-18-2011, 02:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That was originally connected to ground through a switch. It was originally intended as a means to switch the sample and hold on and off. The Esteban modified version removed the sample and hold feature by deleting the lower switching to ground. This Esteban modification causes ES1 to remain in the closed position, and allows only ES3 to operate at the antenna to discharge it 50 or 60 times a second. You should get the equivalent Esteban modification by removing ES1 and replacing it with a direct conductor from IC1 to IC2 + C9, and removing ES2 and pullup resistor R8 (15k) completely. The unused cmos inputs should be pulled up or down so they aren't floating to pick up charges from the air. See the original circuit below: Be sure to read the original translated description for the circuit in PDF at this link: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/attac...1&d=1148598254 You can see the 4066 data sheet attached in PDF below. Be sure to use a good quality 4066 from a major American manufacturer or Asian manufacturer. Poor performance was reported for some generic versions. Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#667
11-18-2011, 03:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thanks J_P.
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging!
|
|
#668
11-18-2011, 11:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Maybe this people found treasures by chance??? dont know,but you can see most of the people who build the MINI ZAHORI claims have found something,and all the people who build the big zahori claim to found nothing... So,dont know,make your choice
|
|
#669
11-19-2011, 07:37 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I don't believe that ion detectors have the ability to find gold from long distance. Maybe only over the buried object. But over the object if the depth is not high then a metal detector is better. I don't know what is happening if the depth is very high......
If ion detector has results over the buried object at high depth then it is a good utility for lrl who have pinpoint problem.  But what is happening with electron emition of silver and copper???? maybe J_P knows. Regards 
__________________
Geo
|
|
#670
11-19-2011, 08:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
What I can tell you is I never found any buried treasure with a charge sensor. I found a lot of detection of charged objects, of old crt screens, and I could locate power wires that are hidden behind walls. You can read the same things that Ivconic could find with his differential amp ion detector. I found the same kind of things, but not buried treasure, same as Ivconic did not. Here is what you need to know about buried gold, silver and copper: 1. The gold you hunt for is not pure gold. It almost always has some silver and copper alloyed into it, and sometimes other metals too. The same is true for natural gold deposits under the ground -- almost never pure gold, and always some silver or copper and maybe other metals too. 2. When metal is buried in the soil, it can corrode because of the action of chemicals in the ground. Water is not necessary because there are microbes which secrete cyanide and organic acids which will attack gold, silver, and copper. If water is present, it can help to dissolve and suspend the ions from these metals and other metals in the soil. 3. The metal ions which are formed from shallow buried metals will quickly combine with other chemicals in the soil to become salts. Or gold will convert back into the original metal in the case of gold ions becoming micro gold particles if they are close to the surface. In order for these ions to remain as ions in the soil, the metal must be buried more than 10-12 cm deep. 4. When metal is buried more than 10-12 cm deep, the corrosion will take a long time to happen. This is because it depends on certain microbes to find the metal and produce microscopic amounts of cyanide and organic acids which very slowly dissolve the metals. It can take many years for enough microscopic drops of cyanide and acids to dissolve any measurable amount of gold ions. And after hundreds of years, we see that not enough gold has dissolved to see a difference on the surface. A quick polishing will make it look like new. The amount of gold and other metal dissolved is extremely tiny. This is how fresh buried metal is different from long time buried metal. Fresh buried metal will not have the microscopic corrosion that long time buried metal has. 5. When metal is buried more than 10-12 cm deep for long enough, the ions that dissolve into the soil will begin to migrate upward in a column toward the surface. They will continue following this column until they reach the level of 10-12 cm depth, where they will combine with other chemicals in the soil and will stop being ions. The size of this column is much bigger than the size of the buried metal. 6. When gold dissolves in the soil due to microbe-caused corrosion, only a very tiny amount of gold dissolves. The amount of gold is somewhere around 0.3 parts per trillion. If this piece of gold is 5% silver alloy, there will be hundreds of times more silver ions that corrode into the same soil as the gold ions. The same is true for the copper that is alloyed into the gold, and other metals. So when you are thinking you have a rich concentration of gold ions in the soil, you really have a weak concentration of gold ions. But you have a very much stronger concentration of copper and silver ions, and even other metal ions. 7. Gold, silver and copper do not simply corrode into ions then convert back to hard substances at the surface. There are many ionic chemical changes happening under the ground. Gold ions are usually suspended in sulfur complexes and organic acids. They can convert back to gold, then back to ions in their journey to the surface, depending on how the chemical and electrical environment changes during their journey. They can attach to many different kinds of molecules and complexes before they finally reach the last 10-12 cm 8. The trails of ions that are formed by metals in the ground can travel for over a thousand meters upward to reach the surface. But it does not matter whether it is traveling 1000 meters or 100 meters... The scientists who measure these ions must dig a hole and remove a soil sample to take to a laboratory. At the laboratory they have special instruments that make chemical reactions and measurements to the soil sample. After they take these laboratory measurements, then they can detect the 0.3 parts per trillion of gold ions to show there is gold below the hole they dig. The answer to your question is hidden in the 8 paragraphs I typed above. But you need to use logic to figure it out. Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#672
11-19-2011, 05:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
My opinion is missing zahori circuit. who knows the subject to answer questions vermemektedirler.Boşa time to prevent the growth of labor to progress to keep you entertained. Zahori sensor operation to be done, is. Rod antenna for wide-area search may be. My opinion zahori detects gold and attracts others. But the ion sensor is required.
|
|
#673
11-21-2011, 12:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#674
01-30-2012, 02:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It’s been awhile since the last posts hear, just wondered if anyone has any field test results with the ZAHORI and MINI ZAHORI ?
|
|
#675
02-01-2012, 05:16 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
