Temperature, the best friend of LRL's

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Esteban

More important is wet in air than temperature. Excess of wet "shortcircuit" the field.


Regards

Hi Esteban.
I agree but simple i write what i see at my experiments. If i had an answer there was not reason to write anything

Regards

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by J_Player

As far as laboratory conditions, I would suggest taking the laboratory to the field, and set it up in a manner that cannot interfere with the electric field and other known anomalies that develop around long-time buried metals.

Best wishes,
J_P

Exactly! At least "start" eliminating ALL those parameters that could influence the result, until only the true "field(?)" as their theory defines - remains.

Until that is the course of action, all other random observations and results(?) are completely futile.

Nobody said making technology advancements would be easy - but if all we are dealing with here is fringe technology based on random uncontrolled observations, than perhaps it is time to accept the fact that it simply is not a valid concept; ....and move on.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Theseus

Exactly! At least "start" eliminating ALL those parameters that could influence the result, until only the true "field(?)" as their theory defines - remains.

Until that is the course of action, all other random observations and results(?) are completely futile.

Nobody said making technology advancements would be easy - but if all we are dealing with here is fringe technology based on random uncontrolled observations, than perhaps it is time to accept the fact that it simply is not a valid concept; ....and move on.

I agree with all of you ( i don't have any theory to give to you), but PLEASE explain me why every midday with temp >34oC i can locate the buried objects very good???. It is a experiment. I write the results.
If you don't have answer , you can't reject the results of the experiment. I am not a physic.... but guys that are physics please let give a answer.
But please not again as the dowsing, "we can't answer how it work, so it don't work "

Regards

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

But please not again as the dowsing, "we can't answer how it work, so it don't work "

That's like asking a man - "When did you stop beating your wife?"

The question makes certain assumptions.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Geo

I agree with all of you ( i don't have any theory to give to you), but PLEASE explain me why every midday with temp >34oC i can locate the buried objects very good???. It is a experiment. I write the results.
If you don't have answer , you can't reject the results of the experiment. I am not a physic.... but guys that are physics please let give a answer.
But please not again as the dowsing, "we can't answer how it work, so it don't work "

Regards

First, dowsing is a poor example to use as an analogy. Why? Because, to my knowledge, every single time the practice of dowsing has been fairly tested under controlled and monitored conditions, it has been shown to NOT work any better than what could be expected from ordinary "guessing" (chance results). In that regard, answering a question about how it works is by default making the assumption that it does work, when clearly the practice of dowsing does not work in the first place.

Secondly... Yes, results of experiments may be rejected, especially if under close examination by multiple observers, the conditions of the test protocol are found to be lacking in controls and/or poor design criteria.

I cannot be a true observer of your experiment from this distance, only offer valid suggestions based on the scant information you place here; hence cannot render an opinion about your protocol or design. However, as one who has prior experience in the design and implementation of testing procedures, I was merely offering the suggestion to; "start" eliminating ALL those parameters that could influence the result, until only the true "field(?)" as their theory defines - remains.

As far as your question; why every midday with temp >34oC i can locate the buried objects very good???

My best educated guess (from this distance) would be you probably have a temperature sensitive component in your LRL detecting device and it is giving you a false result above a certain temperature.

I still contend you first need to eliminate the parameter of temperature change from the experiment, and identify/quantify the real "field"(?) you believe you are measuring.

[Max]

Originally Posted by Geo

I agree with all of you ( i don't have any theory to give to you), but PLEASE explain me why every midday with temp >34oC i can locate the buried objects very good???. It is a experiment. I write the results.
If you don't have answer , you can't reject the results of the experiment. I am not a physic.... but guys that are physics please let give a answer.
But please not again as the dowsing, "we can't answer how it work, so it don't work "

Regards

Hi,
if so... and device have consistent behaviour at 34°C my advice is that you post schematic, diagrams of antenna, instructions for tuning etc... everything.

People with electronic mind will replicate it (hopefully) and start experiments like you... people with physics mind or education could then give an interpretation based on experiments results.

I don't see any other way to help you understand this... if it's random or not... if work as LRL or not and how...

Of course, you can choose not to publish schematic etc... but then why ask here for answers nobody can give with so few data ?

Your choice.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Theseus

Exactly! At least "start" eliminating ALL those parameters that could influence the result, until only the true "field(?)" as their theory defines - remains.

Until that is the course of action, all other random observations and results(?) are completely futile.

Nobody said making technology advancements would be easy - but if all we are dealing with here is fringe technology based on random uncontrolled observations, than perhaps it is time to accept the fact that it simply is not a valid concept; ....and move on.

Yes... More important, some people are forming conclusions based on fringe data collected from fringe technology.

Esteban has a good approach. He says he doesn't know the answers, but he sometimes assumes. I think in most cases his assumptions work, but in some cases, no.

Best wishes,
J_P

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Geo

I agree with all of you ( i don't have any theory to give to you), but PLEASE explain me why every midday with temp >34oC i can locate the buried objects very good???. It is a experiment. I write the results.
If you don't have answer , you can't reject the results of the experiment. I am not a physic.... but guys that are physics please let give a answer.
But please not again as the dowsing, "we can't answer how it work, so it don't work "

Regards

I am not a physicist, but I have talked about picking up these weak signals with an astrophysicist who specialized in locating long time buried metals and other minerals. What he told me is the most important problem with detection is the very small signal is masked by much larger signals that come on a daily cycle. The timing for this cycle will vary a little in different parts of the world. But he told me in North America, he takes his readings between 8:00am morning, and noon. He says that after 2:00 pm afternoon, the signal has deteriorated too much for reliable readings. He found that these times can be shifted more than several hours at different locations on the earth. He found that it is best to take readings, then more readings the next day at the same time to verify the readings are good.

He explained the source of this cycle, which is tied to the solar charging in the outer ionosphere, and he showed me on his instruments that measured a number of geophysical phenomenon that change during this daily cycle. He said that solar storms can upset the daily cycle to make his instruments useless until the solar storm is gone. As I recall, none of this was linked to temperature. He also told me he calibrates his equipment to a null point before making surveys. I think that any temperature compensation is taken care of during his nulling procedure.

Now, maybe in your case, this daily cycle has nothing to do with the confused readings you are finding. Maybe it is only the temperature that is causing inconsistent readings. Somehow, I think there is more to it than just temperature.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi,
to me the thing is really easy: only way to know if "works" like explained is that he will post everything and people will make clones and experiments in e.g. different parts of the world and with different e.g. components etc

Other discussions about this topic can't be useful... cause we are talking of what ?

We don't know schematic he used, we don't know about components, we don't know about antenna details (cause I think there's more/different than posted already), we don't know about tuning procedure, we don't know about test field specifications, we don't know about anything but... that at some temperature (34°C) seems to him device detects something!

I mean... is impossible even making assumptions of any kind... with all that missing details.

It's like say you wanna understand why a TV set lose/mix colors in an attempt to understand and repair it... without opening the cover and don't have schematic or any knowledge base available for faults.

It's plain impossible. Dot.

Kind regards,
Max

[Geo]

Originally Posted by J_Player

I am not a physicist, but I have talked about picking up these weak signals with an astrophysicist who specialized in locating long time buried metals and other minerals. What he told me is the most important problem with detection is the very small signal is masked by much larger signals that come on a daily cycle. The timing for this cycle will vary a little in different parts of the world. But he told me in North America, he takes his readings between 8:00am morning, and noon. He says that after 2:00 pm afternoon, the signal has deteriorated too much for reliable readings. He found that these times can be shifted more than several hours at different locations on the earth. He found that it is best to take readings, then more readings the next day at the same time to verify the readings are good.

He explained the source of this cycle, which is tied to the solar charging in the outer ionosphere, and he showed me on his instruments that measured a number of geophysical phenomenon that change during this daily cycle. He said that solar storms can upset the daily cycle to make his instruments useless until the solar storm is gone. As I recall, none of this was linked to temperature. He also told me he calibrates his equipment to a null point before making surveys. I think that any temperature compensation is taken care of during his nulling procedure.

Now, maybe in your case, this daily cycle has nothing to do with the confused readings you are finding. Maybe it is only the temperature that is causing inconsistent readings. Somehow, I think there is more to it than just temperature.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi J_P.
I regard this answer.
Today i was spoke with a friend about the temperature "phenomenon". He told me about the same with you. He has read that the magnetic lines differs from time to time, so i must check the phenomenon and other hours, for example very early the morning.

Regards

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

That's like asking a man - "When did you stop beating your wife?"

The question makes certain assumptions.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Theseus

As far as your question; why every midday with temp >34oC i can locate the buried objects very good???

My best educated guess (from this distance) would be you probably have a temperature sensitive component in your LRL detecting device and it is giving you a false result above a certain temperature.

I still contend you first need to eliminate the parameter of temperature change from the experiment, and identify/quantify the real "field"(?) you believe you are measuring.

And why the LRL works only in the line of the buried coins???? Why it don't beep at any other place???
General i don't try to tell all you that it is sure the temperature that makes the LRL to work. Simple i connect the working of LRL every midday with the high temperature. I wrote my results and i liked an answer as J_P.
Maybe i am a strange people but i like answers as "this is not right..... the right is this ... or this... or i read something about it". I don't like answers as "This don't work.... or you have mistake... End"


Anyway... Regards

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Max

Hi,
if so... and device have consistent behaviour at 34°C my advice is that you post schematic, diagrams of antenna, instructions for tuning etc... everything.

People with electronic mind will replicate it (hopefully) and start experiments like you... people with physics mind or education could then give an interpretation based on experiments results.

I don't see any other way to help you understand this... if it's random or not... if work as LRL or not and how...

Of course, you can choose not to publish schematic etc... but then why ask here for answers nobody can give with so few data ?

Your choice.

Kind regards,
Max

Hi Max.
I don't think that it is bad to put here the results of my experiment!!!!
Schematic is a simple magnet field detector from ELEKTOR (1995 i think). Nothing special so to spend their time the "best electronics" for it. If Carl let me to attach the schematic, No problem.

Regards

[Esteban]

Geo, the MFD works also in cold, here is now minimum 12 ºC, max. 21 ºC, and works. But maybe you must to use the first led bright all the time. Put in on in day and check at night. Is extinguish, readjust preset for leds. Put in this parameter and try. This is made for my cousin Ruben. Consist in 30 turns wire 0.40 mm in a form 15 cm diam. The led of the center is always on. This is the first led in bargraph.

Regards

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

But please not again as the dowsing, "we can't answer how it work, so it don't work "

Regards

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

That's like asking a man - "When did you stop beating your wife?"

The question makes certain assumptions.

Originally Posted by Geo

The assumptions are:

1. That dowsing actually works.
2. That you have been beating your wife.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Geo, the MFD works also in cold, here is now minimum 12 ºC, max. 21 ºC, and works. But maybe you must to use the first led bright all the time. Put in on in day and check at night. Is extinguish, readjust preset for leds. Put in this parameter and try. This is made for my cousin Ruben. Consist in 30 turns wire 0.40 mm in a form 15 cm diam. The led of the center is always on. This is the first led in bargraph.

Regards

Hi Esteban.
Thanks for info.
Maybe we dont use the same schematic, but it is about the same. My schematic use the LM3915 for the leds as your detector. I adjust the MDF with the first led to be between on and off( to flash a little). With the same adjust my MFD don't work on afternoon and on night. Maybe early the morning. I will try it. Olso i will try the coil as your cousin.

Regards.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Geo

And why the LRL works only in the line of the buried coins???? Why it don't beep at any other place???
General i don't try to tell all you that it is sure the temperature that makes the LRL to work. Simple i connect the working of LRL every midday with the high temperature. I wrote my results and i liked an answer as J_P.
Maybe i am a strange people but i like answers as "this is not right..... the right is this ... or this... or i read something about it". I don't like answers as "This don't work.... or you have mistake... End"


Anyway... Regards

I suppose it is only natural to "like" those answers that tend to agree with and support your own thinking, and reject those that are not what you want to hear. It is a common trait to keep asking questions until you get answers you like, and then utilize only those answers to formulate your conclusions.

That, in and of itself however, is not enough to make the other responses you get "wrong", especially in light of the fact that the information you've so far provided is a bit "sketchy" to say the least.

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Theseus

I suppose it is only natural to "like" those answers that tend to agree with and support your own thinking, and reject those that are not what you want to hear. It is a common trait to keep asking questions until you get answers you like, and then utilize only those answers to formulate your conclusions.

That, in and of itself however, is not enough to make the other responses you get "wrong", especially in light of the fact that the information you've so far provided is a bit "sketchy" to say the least.

Exactly.....
It was widely known that the earth is the center of the universe for centuries. Nobody paid attention to Copernicus arguments and mathematical evidence to suggest we are not the center of the universe. Thus, people only listened to their favourite answers that proved the earth is the center of the universe. At least until Galileo came along and showed them Copernicus was right, by using his telescope. But there are still people who cling to listening to only the arguments that tend to prove their favourite ideas are correct. I believe there are still people alive who believe the starship Enterprise is the center of the universe, which happens to move every time the starship moves.

Oh well.. That's science for you

Besr wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Exactly.....
It was widely known that the earth is the center of the universe for centuries. Nobody paid attention to Copernicus arguments and mathematical evidence to suggest we are not the center of the universe. Thus, people only listened to their favourite arguments to prove the earth is the center of the universe. At least until Galileo came along and showed them what's what with a telescope. But there are still people who cling to listening to only the arguments that tend to prove their favourite ideas are correct. I believe there are still people alive who believe the starship Enterprise is the center of the universe, which happens to move every time the starship moves.

Oh well.. That's science for you

Besr wishes,


J_P

Exactly.....

Does we say the same?????

Regards

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Geo

Exactly.....

Does we say the same?????

Regards

Sure...
We all have it the same for looking only at answers that tend to support our own thinking.
The only difference is the degree of our willingness to look at other answers too.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Sure...
We all have it the same for looking only at answers that tend to support our own thinking.
The only difference is the degree of our willingness to look at other answers too.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hahaha... Yes.
We agree ...
When you read the threads in remote Sensing, you see exactly what you say.

Regards

[ALEX.356]

I consider JP's post significant and GEO will certainly pay attention to it.
You need to investigate the LRL's behavour 24 times a day. i.e. every hour , noting of course date, time temp. and humidity and range of detection.
We ll be able to eliminate some paragons and arrive at some conclusions studying these data.
Kind regards,
Alex 356

[hung]

Originally Posted by ALEX.356

You need to investigate the LRL's behavour 24 times a day. i.e. every hour , noting of course date, time temp. and humidity and range of detection.
We ll be able to eliminate some paragons and arrive at some conclusions studying these data.
Kind regards,
Alex 356

All data regarding the phenomena behavior has been discussed here by me and Esteban for the past 4 years in this forum based on our own experiences and also on many conversations we both had with Alonso and Damasio.
So any temptaive to do what you suggest above would be just like one to 'reinvent the wheel'.. Read the many posts about it available.

I just read some explanations above about this, claimed by some scientists and they are wrong. This is natural, as they talk about a phenomena which they ignore and use their scientific basis of other things and fail when trying to fill 'the shoes' for a specific scenario.

Unlike some here think, if the LRL(ionic/electrostatic based) is fine built and tuned for the phenomena, detection is fine during all day although around noon is when the poorest caption is achieved. At evening/night, sometimes it becomes even better.

Regards.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by hung

All data regarding the phenomena behavior has been discussed here by me and Esteban for the past 4 years in this forum based on our own experiences and also on many conversations we both had with Alonso and Damasio.Regards.

Too bad that during all this time you were not able to get to any real conclusion.
So nice try with "reinventing the wheel" but no cigar

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by hung

I just read some explanations above about this, claimed by some scientists and they are wrong. This is natural, as they talk about a phenomena which they ignore and use their scientific basis of other things and fail when trying to fill 'the shoes' for a specific scenario.
Regards.

Spoken like a true pseudo-scientist.

And now I will debunker the debunkerer....

If adequate methods of testing hypotheses aren't known or applied, faulty explanations of actual phenomena can live on through generations, simply because the only thing that matters is that "it seems to work.

The propensity to score the hits and neglect the misses is probably the number one reason for the flourishing of superstition and pseudoscience today, including dowsing.

Simple truths about nature can't choose to hide from the skeptical minds and be seen by the gullible at the same time.

Once a device or phenomenon has developed around poor theories, it essentially halts all useful progress by its practitioners until the idea is reintegrated with the larger scientific community. The institutionalization of theories and devices in an uncritical atmosphere and away from the larger scientific community almost guarantees that there will be a continuing sequence of "positive" results, sometimes for centuries, even though the phenomena remain slippery, understanding remains vague, and discovery of new knowledge is left to the rest of science. In short, a duck is born. Quack, quack.



Read it and weep.