some cosiderations

[J_Player]

Hi Max,
Is it possible that there are already people using passive electronic instruments to locate buried gold? Have you convinced yourself it can't happen only because you don't know the exact technique they use?

Suppose 100 years ago someone claimed they could locate people hiding in the distance in the middle of the night from over 100 feet, no matter how dark the night is, without turning on any lights or building a fire to illuminate the area. People would laugh at this claim. However, this is easily done by anyone with a night vision scope today, without the need for illumination other than existing starlight. The reason people did not believe it possible is because they did not know the technique.

If the disbelievers had studied the science applicable to the light spectrum and electronics to learn enough of the details, and they also used some imagination to build a new device that worked on principles that were not in use at the time, they could have developed the first crude long range starlight imaging methods.

Today we have the advantage of a large array of existing technology that is highly developed compared to what existed 100 years ago. If you wanted to experiment with low-light imaging, you will find you can buy photomultiplier arrays, compact power supplies, pre-ground lenses with motorized zoom features, etc without the need to invent each of these supporting components to make low-light long range detector.

Is it really impossible to use the power from the natural phenomena observable from the earth and it's atmosphere to locate buried treasure? I doubt you will know the answer until after someone doing it shows you how.

It is good to protect your money from frauds who want you to pay thousands of dollars for equipment they refuse to demonstrate working. This is where skepticism helps you to protect your interests. But if there is no investment of your money other than a little time and parts to experiment with, you have little to lose and potentially a lot to gain by searching for a method to locate treasures from a long distance.

Many technically inclined people are able to build complicated electronic devices when they are shown the schematics to build with. Some of the more advanced technicians can find ways to modify circuits to work better. But to build a new technology that has not been tried is beyond the ability of many of these electronic experts. It requires a little imagination combined with expert electronic construction to develop a new technology that works to measure low-level anomalies in physical properties that exist around buried metals.

Consider - in this case, there is nobody asking you to send thousands of dollars. The only request is to think of a technique and experiment to make a working locator. I can guarantee you can't do it if you first decide it can't be done. Same as 1500s explorers were not able to find the Americas until after watching Columbus, they became convinced it can be done and actually tried it.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Max,
Is it possible that there are already people using passive electronic instruments to locate buried gold? Have you convinced yourself it can't happen only because you don't know the exact technique they use?

Suppose 100 years ago someone claimed they could locate people hiding in the distance in the middle of the night from over 100 feet, no matter how dark the night is, without turning on any lights or building a fire to illuminate the area. People would laugh at this claim. However, this is easily done by anyone with a night vision scope today, without the need for illumination other than existing starlight. The reason people did not believe it possible is because they did not know the technique.

If the disbelievers had studied the science applicable to the light spectrum and electronics to learn enough of the details, and they also used some imagination to build a new device that worked on principles that were not in use at the time, they could have developed the first crude long range starlight imaging methods.

Today we have the advantage of a large array of existing technology that is highly developed compared to what existed 100 years ago. If you wanted to experiment with low-light imaging, you will find you can buy photomultiplier arrays, compact power supplies, pre-ground lenses with motorized zoom features, etc without the need to invent each of these supporting components to make low-light long range detector.

Is it really impossible to use the power from the natural phenomena observable from the earth and it's atmosphere to locate buried treasure? I doubt you will know the answer until after someone doing it shows you how.

It is good to protect your money from frauds who want you to pay thousands of dollars for equipment they refuse to demonstrate working. This is where skepticism helps you to protect your interests. But if there is no investment of your money other than a little time and parts to experiment with, you have little to lose and potentially a lot to gain by searching for a method to locate treasures from a long distance.

Many technically inclined people are able to build complicated electronic devices when they are shown the schematics to build with. Some of the more advanced technicians can find ways to modify circuits to work better. But to build a new technology that has not been tried is beyond the ability of many of these electronic experts. It requires a little imagination combined with expert electronic construction to develop a new technology that works to measure low-level anomalies in physical properties that exist around buried metals.

Consider - in this case, there is nobody asking you to send thousands of dollars. The only request is to think of a technique and experiment to make a working locator. I can guarantee you can't do it if you first decide it can't be done. Same as 1500s explorers were not able to find the Americas until after watching Columbus, they became convinced it can be done and actually tried it.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi,
what you said is right. Maybe exist a way to made LRL as passive locator, thus using some natural behaviour (a natural originated physical phenomenon). My real problem thinking at a way like this is cause of noise sources. But maybe is just my problem, maybe that phenomenon can be used cause is suitable avoiding also that problems.

Maybe just my previous experiences with some "anomaly detectors" (stuff for finding power lines and other things like that) told me wrong things cause I think at electrometers like detectors.

But phenomenon could be different. Right.
Just I can't see any suitable one, at now, for passive LRL.

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

Originally Posted by Max

My real problem thinking at a way like this is cause of noise sources.
...But phenomenon could be different. Right.

The biggest problem to overcome with an electronic LRL is noise. We are looking to identify exrtremely small anomalies over a large area full of noise from outside physical sources. If there was no outside noise, we would still need to deal with the internal electronic noise when measuring such small signals. The internal noise is best dealt with by eliminating the noise sources from the input side of the amplifiers (resistor noise and coupling from other parts of the circuitry). Of course we would be using the lowest noise components available to start with. Even if the circuitry is optimized for low noise detection, we still have external sources to filter or cancel.

A passive electronic LRL does not need to be limited to the circuit designs we have seen like Zahori and similar. It is true the phenomenon could be different than measuring electric field anomalies. In fact there could be several phenomena involved in building a high-reliability LRL. Consider the night-vision example I explained earlier: There are some night vision scopes that convert ambient infrared to visible images by using lenses and infrared image sensors to detect patterns that cannot be seen with the eye. These scopes also use sophisticated electronics to amplify the and convert the invisible received signal to visible light levels and adjust the intensity for easy recognition. Another variant of this night vision scope transmits infrared over the field of view to illuminate the targets and make them more visible (non-passive design).

These concepts can be used in the development of a working LRL. We are not trying to detect the image of someone hiding in the dark, but we have more phenomena to work with than the night vision example. When designing a LRL to find long time buried metal, we are not limited to looking only at the electric field anomalies. There are also many other physical anomalies that come as a result of buried metal with trace amounts of ions in a column of soil above it. Here is a partial list of some of the phenomena that can be expected to show at least a faint anomaly:

• variation in the electric field of the air around soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in the atmospheric leakage of current through the air above soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in chemical activity and soil chemistry due to the presence of metal-eating microbes.
• variation in metal radionuclides emmitted above this soil with metal ions.
• Variation in telluric earth currents.
• variation in magnetic field lines, depending on surrounding soil conditions.
• variation in local radio signal patterns from natural and man-made sources.

These variations may be extremely small and hard to measure. We rely on the energy mostly from the sun and other space energies to ultimately supply the power that generates the dim signals that we might measure. Now what happens when we discover some phenomena that is not quite strong enough to give a measurable signal? By understanding the details of the energies that power these phenomena, we can construct equipment to energize the area artifically. We cannot expect to guess what to transmit and at what levels. It requires examining what caused these anomalies to appear. In some cases there have been exceptions where experimenters stumbled onto unexpected responses. These also work, but we have no clue to what is causing the accidental response and how to optimize it.

Can any of this really work? I can guarantee there are several approaches of passive long range detection in use today which pinpoint long time buried metal, and have been in use for over 2 decades with varying degrees of success depending on the approach and sophistication of the electronics. The answers come with education and knowledge of the process, not by deciding it can't be done because we haven't figured out how yet.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Max,



The biggest problem to overcome with an electronic LRL is noise. We are looking to identify exrtremely small anomalies over a large area full of noise from outside physical sources. If there was no outside noise, we would still need to deal with the internal electronic noise when measuring such small signals. The internal noise is best dealt with by eliminating the noise sources from the input side of the amplifiers (resistor noise and coupling from other parts of the circuitry). Of course we would be using the lowest noise components available to start with. Even if the circuitry is optimized for low noise detection, we still have external sources to filter or cancel.

A passive electronic LRL does not need to be limited to the circuit designs we have seen like Zahori and similar. It is true the phenomenon could be different than measuring electric field anomalies. In fact there could be several phenomena involved in building a high-reliability LRL. Consider the night-vision example I explained earlier: There are some night vision scopes that convert ambient infrared to visible images by using lenses and infrared image sensors to detect patterns that cannot be seen with the eye. These scopes also use sophisticated electronics to amplify the and convert the invisible received signal to visible light levels and adjust the intensity for easy recognition. Another variant of this night vision scope transmits infrared over the field of view to illuminate the targets and make them more visible (non-passive design).

These concepts can be used in the development of a working LRL. We are not trying to detect the image of someone hiding in the dark, but we have more phenomena to work with than the night vision example. When designing a LRL to find long time buried metal, we are not limited to looking only at the electric field anomalies. There are also many other physical anomalies that come as a result of buried metal with trace amounts of ions in a column of soil above it. Here is a partial list of some of the phenomena that can be expected to show at least a faint anomaly:

• variation in the electric field of the air around soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in the atmospheric leakage of current through the air above soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in chemical activity and soil chemistry due to the presence of metal-eating microbes.
• variation in metal radionuclides emmitted above this soil with metal ions.
• Variation in telluric earth currents.
• variation in magnetic field lines, depending on surrounding soil conditions.
• variation in local radio signal patterns from natural and man-made sources.

These variations may be extremely small and hard to measure. We rely on the energy mostly from the sun and other space energies to ultimately supply the power that generates the dim signals that we might measure. Now what happens when we discover some phenomena that is not quite strong enough to give a measurable signal? By understanding the details of the energies that power these phenomena, we can construct equipment to energize the area artifically. We cannot expect to guess what to transmit and at what levels. It requires examining what caused these anomalies to appear. In some cases there have been exceptions where experimenters stumbled onto unexpected responses. These also work, but we have no clue to what is causing the accidental response and how to optimize it.

Can any of this really work? I can guarantee there are several approaches of passive long range detection in use today which pinpoint long time buried metal, and have been in use for over 2 decades with varying degrees of success depending on the approach and sophistication of the electronics. The answers come with education and knowledge of the process, not by deciding it can't be done because we haven't figured out how yet.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
"I can guarantee there are several approaches of passive long range detection in use today which pinpoint long time buried metal, and have been in use for over 2 decades with varying degrees of success depending on the approach and sophistication of the electronics. "

Are you referring to commercial LRLs (past ones ?) or to prototypes-only-not-commercial devices ?

Can you make some examples of (supposed) working LRLs ?

I think that the real obstacle is finding a suitable phenomenon that could reveal at distance the presence of metallic objects buried... for a passive device.

Example: due to the shielding effect of soil, that's damn good e.g. at least for lower (lower in the hi-spectrum e.g. VHF or UHF) frequencies EM radiations (and lower energy) is almost impossible rely on some kind of EM interaction, from remote and in a passive way, that could reveal the target presence, when target is buried even at small depth (few inches).

Of course, other kind of phenomenon could take place and reveal just wanted interactions... but which ? Really hard to figure out a suitable one, reliable and useful for localization of the (supposed) target.

Think e.g. at bacteria... of course one could sniff e.g. for gases subproducts of their activity and find some information about the "proximity" of e.g. gold in the soil (not necessarly a treasure, of course) ...but then how to locate the hot spot... seems to me like sniffing e.g. a geiser... to try to figure out were the magna is. Not so good. You could figure out e.g. if gases and vapours have ions mixed in... but never locate the magma chamber that way.

Otherwise e.g. for magnetometers that you know reveal for real variations on the local Earth magnetic field... but for ferromagnetic targets only and big masses. But are almost useless in TH if you don't consider ship wrecks locating from boats... underwater TH. For sure unuseful to find e.g. gold.
I dubt that anyone could use e.g. Earth magnetic field variations due to a gold bar to locate the gold bar! No way.

Electric fields and variation in the atmospheric leakage currents are unreliable cause there are hundreds (or thousands) of variables involved... so few gold ions in soil can't give any extra gradient to detect here.

Metal radionuclides emmitted above this soil with metal ions and variation in telluric earth currents seems interesting but a kind of clear correlation must be found to make them useful in that research. (radionuclides can be there or not... due to geological soil composition and so method is unreliable)

Big task find one suitable principle.

Kind regards,
Max

[Dell Winders]

Very Good, JP. At last, after years of wasted time being bashed watching the Skeptic monkey can only do what monkey see Carl, do mentality, it's good to see an EE on this forum that employs rational thinking and excellent logic. Keep up the good works. Dell

[J_Player]

Hi Dell,

Thanks for the good thought.

For the record, I am not an EE, I am not affiliated with any EE or other person in this forum, and I do not encourage buying any products that are not demonstrated to work live in front of a buyer to his satisfaction as the advertising descriptions characterize it working.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Very Good, JP. At last, after years of wasted time being bashed watching the Skeptic monkey can only do what monkey see Carl, do mentality, it's good to see an EE on this forum that employs rational thinking and excellent logic. Keep up the good works. Dell

Hi Dell,
we are just discussing the topic... in a scientific prospective.
I'm still puzzled about many things, you know I'm SKEPTIC on the LRL topic in general and commercial-LRL in particular.

That doesn't mean I'm not open mind, like someone said here... before you !

Just that any approach using star-trek's pistols and uncle-dowsing-rods... will fail finding any gold Dell, by definition.

Or have you decided to partecipate and win the Carl's LRL Challenge ???
(to demonstrate that your commercial-LRLs work )

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

It appears to me the reason you can't imagine a method of locating buried metal from a long distance is partly because your source of information is not good. It appears you are relying on commonly believed ideas rather than looking at the research that shows what is really observed and known.

For an example, suppose I said I can locate Carl's 10 ounce gold bar buried 2 inches deep in soil using only an instrument that measures the existing magnetic field. Suppose I said I could locate this gold bar buried in one of ten locations spaced 10 feet apart from each other, in an area of land that I choose within 10 miles of where Carl lives. If I conducted a magnetic survey over the soil where the gold might be buried using only an instrument to measure the existing magnetic field, and not allowing the magnetometer to actually touch the soil, do you believe I cannot find the gold bar?

Here are my 3 questions for you:
1. Do you believe I could find Carl's 10 ounce gold bar with this magnetic field instrument on the first try?
2. Do you believe I could find Carl's 10 ounce gold bar with this magnetic field instrument 7 times out of 10?
3. Do you think Carl would allow me to keep the 10 ounce gold bar if I was able to locate it with this magnetic field instrument 7 times out of 10?

(Hint: No way! Carl is too smart to let me use a magnetometer to locate his gold bar and win any prize from him)

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Max,

It appears to me the reason you can't imagine a method of locating buried metal from a long distance is partly because your source of information is not good. It appears you are relying on commonly believed ideas rather than looking at the research that shows what is really observed and known.

For an example, suppose I said I can locate Carl's 10 ounce gold bar buried 2 inches deep in soil using only an instrument that measures the existing magnetic field. Suppose I said I could locate this gold bar buried in one of ten locations spaced 10 feet apart from each other, in an area of land that I choose within 10 miles of where Carl lives. If I conducted a magnetic survey over the soil where the gold might be buried using only an instrument to measure the existing magnetic field, and not allowing the magnetometer to actually touch the soil, do you believe I cannot find the gold bar?

Here are my 3 questions for you:
1. Do you believe I could find Carl's 10 ounce gold bar with this magnetic field instrument on the first try?
2. Do you believe I could find Carl's 10 ounce gold bar with this magnetic field instrument 7 times out of 10?
3. Do you think Carl would allow me to keep the 10 ounce gold bar if I was able to locate it with this magnetic field instrument 7 times out of 10?

(Hint: No way! Carl is too smart to let me use a magnetometer to locate his gold bar and win any prize from him)

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
"If I conducted a magnetic survey over the soil where the gold might be buried using only an instrument to measure the existing magnetic field, and not allowing the magnetometer to actually touch the soil, do you believe I cannot find the gold bar? "

Is a rethoric question ?
But are we talking about LRL not about "preventive surveys" here... ?

Can you locate the gold bar without making a preventive survey ???

NO.

That's the point. So Earth magnetic field distortions caused by e.g. a gold bar aren't useful in LRL. Or you say that you could locate the gold bar anyway (without a preventive survey)?

Kind regards,
Max

[Dell Winders]

Or have you decided to partecipate and win the Carl's LRL Challenge ???
(to demonstrate that your commercial-LRLs work )

That question is so ridiculous, and is asked over & over again to promote Carl's agenda of riducule and untruths.

My answer is still the same. NO! NO! NO!

My products cannot do as you or Carl, seem to expect of them, and cannot pass Carl's, stupid Gimmick Challenge test.

You are playing the same old Skeptic Org. broken record.

I was informed with Randi, standing right beside me, that I only got 6 of the 8 tests he conducted correct. That is considered no better than chance guessing. Randi, said, more testing would have to be done before any conclusions could be reached.

I agree, and I have done years of Field testing with the present LRL configurations . I know the limitations, and have experienced the benefits.

Carl's challenge has no Scientific merit, and is meaningless when it is designed to be un-winnable by LRL except by rare chance luck. It is a sham, a publicity gimmick and you fall hook line & sinker for it, I know better. So, you can give up his bark up my tail and try to learn what real Science investigation is about from JP's example.

Don't critize me, or my products. I do not lie, and The do as I claim they do. Just prove that you can build something less expensive, that works better than I am presently using and I will buy from you.

Promoting Carl's, Skeptic mockery of others to cover up your own ignorance is a poor excuse for being closed minded to reality and the truth. Dell

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

You forget, when we are looking for long time buried metal, there is often a column of metal ions in the soil that begins at the buried metal and continues to the surface. The effects of such an anomaly in the soil have several implications that will cause measurable changes in the telluric properties beneath the soil. Are you aware that mining companies use both telluric and magnetotelluric methods to explore the structure beneath the ground and find ore bodies? Or do you only rely on commonly believed ideas that suggest these methods are not useful to locate metals under the ground? Have you ever read the reports on the precision of gamma detectors used in mining exploration?

Your previous post said many things that are only common beliefs rather than facts. The real facts do not exist in the top of your head. They can be found by reading the reports from researchers who actually measure these things. When you use faulty information from the top of your head, then you can expect to reach faulty conclusions. But if you were to study the actual findings from people who took the trouble to measure these things, then you would have better information to decide what is possible.

Originally Posted by Max

Big task find one suitable principle

I do not believe that measuring one single physical property is a good solution to constructing a long range locator. I believe a reliable LRL will measure an anomaly within the context of several supporting influences associated with the buried target. Thus I think it is not a simple project to whip up a pico-ammeter connected to a field detector or magnetometer. I think if you actually study the processes involved in long-time buried metals, you will find that you need to devise some fairly sophisticated circuitry and perform precise calibrations in order to achieve any degree of reliability in detecting these anomalies. But first you will need to discover which phenomena actually show some measurable signals rather than to make a conclusion from the top of your head, without considering what methods the researchers used to find these signals.

If there was a simple method to locate buried metal at long range with good reliability, then the builders of Zahori would be bringing home amazing treasures and posting photos that make your eyes pop out. You would see tax agents parked outside their homes who follow them everywhere they go. The same is true for people who advertise LRLs that find amazing treasures from long distance. Do you see these LRL advertisers collecting amazing treasures from the ground, or do you see them trying to find money from the bank account of people who buy the detector?

If I was too lazy to research the details of how a metal detector works, I might tell you it is an interesting theory, but look at these reasons why it would not be possible to build a metal detector:
• No electromagnetic coil could make detect non-magnetic metals in the air or under the ground. It must be magnetic to respond to a magnetic field.
• An electromagnetic field must travel too far in the ground to detect buried metals, therefore it is unreliable.
• There are hundreds of magnetic interferences that will make any magnetic signal unreliable.
• The magnetic variations in the soil would interfere with any magnetic field that you try to transmit into the ground. therefore you have no idea what you are looking at under the ground

Sound familiar? These are the same kind of reasons you are giving for why a LRL cannot be developed. If I was ignorant enough to not understand how a metal detector works, and I did not want to read anything that explains metal detector circuits, then I might use these arguments to prevent myself from ever believing metal detection can work, or from trying to build a metal detector. The fact is some of these wrong arguments I posted have some truth in them. We find that there is a very sophisticated art to properly tuning a metal detector to overcome these problems. This is the same for the art of building a long range locator, except it is more difficult for a LRL because of the extremely small signals we are working with, and the combination of phenomena influencing the readings.

I have no interest in trying to prove to you that there are methods of locating buried metals at long range. My objective is to provide some real science involved with buried metals that can be demonstrated and proven by thousands of pages of research. This is the Geotech forum where the purpose is to share technical knowledge, not to spread misconceptions about how geotechnology works. It is not necessary that you believe me. I only hope that people who come here trying to learn the secrets of locating treasure will have some real science to use in their experimenting instead of relying on opinions that it is not possible to develop a LRL.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

That question is so ridiculous, and is asked over & over again to promote Carl's agenda of riducule and untruths.

My answer is still the same. NO! NO! NO!

My products cannot do as you or Carl, seem to expect of them, and cannot pass Carl's, stupid Gimmick Challenge test.

Exactly. Your products are not up to the challenge. So what's new?

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

You are playing the same old Skeptic Org. broken record.

Music to my ears!

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

I was informed with Randi, standing right beside me, that I only got 6 of the 8 tests he conducted correct. That is considered no better than chance guessing. Randi, said, more testing would have to be done before any conclusions could be reached.

I agree, and I have done years of Field testing with the present LRL configurations . I know the limitations, and have experienced the benefits.

As you've rightly stated - no better than chance.

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Carl's challenge has no Scientific merit, and is meaningless when it is designed to be un-winnable by LRL except by rare chance luck. It is a sham, a publicity gimmick and you fall hook line & sinker for it, I know better. So, you can give up his bark up my tail and try to learn what real Science investigation is about from JP's example.

Scientific merit is a subject totally alien to yourself and most other LRL manufacturers.

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Don't critize me, or my products. I do not lie, and The do as I claim they do. Just prove that you can build something less expensive, that works better than I am presently using and I will buy from you.

This is similar to the statement "When did you stop beating your wife?". It is based on an erroneous assumption.

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Promoting Carl's, Skeptic mockery of others to cover up your own ignorance is a poor excuse for being closed minded to reality and the truth. Dell

Perhaps you should re-read your quote above and apply the "closed mind to reality and the truth" statement to your current mindset.

[Max]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

That question is so ridiculous, and is asked over & over again to promote Carl's agenda of riducule and untruths.

My answer is still the same. NO! NO! NO!

My products cannot do as you or Carl, seem to expect of them, and cannot pass Carl's, stupid Gimmick Challenge test.

You are playing the same old Skeptic Org. broken record.

I was informed with Randi, standing right beside me, that I only got 6 of the 8 tests he conducted correct. That is considered no better than chance guessing. Randi, said, more testing would have to be done before any conclusions could be reached.

I agree, and I have done years of Field testing with the present LRL configurations . I know the limitations, and have experienced the benefits.

Carl's challenge has no Scientific merit, and is meaningless when it is designed to be un-winnable by LRL except by rare chance luck. It is a sham, a publicity gimmick and you fall hook line & sinker for it, I know better. So, you can give up his bark up my tail and try to learn what real Science investigation is about from JP's example.

Don't critize me, or my products. I do not lie, and The do as I claim they do. Just prove that you can build something less expensive, that works better than I am presently using and I will buy from you.

Promoting Carl's, Skeptic mockery of others to cover up your own ignorance is a poor excuse for being closed minded to reality and the truth. Dell

Hi Dell,
"My products cannot do as you or Carl, seem to expect of them, and cannot pass Carl's, stupid Gimmick Challenge test."

So , put in other words, you can't give any proof that your products work !

Nice... so in what they work ?
Please explain.

"Just prove that you can build something less expensive, that works better than I am presently using and I will buy from you. "

I never claimed I want to build one, or that I've already done or that could be done by me or "better" than "yours" (or vernel or whatever).
Just said e.g. that "even a monkey" could design e.g. a better POWER SUPPLY to avoid the battery waste in mineoro's PDC210.
Claims are yours and of other manifacturers/dealers about LRLs.

So proof that the stuff you sell work is up to you, my friend.

I'm not interested in your "tail" but in your claims (and of others) about LRLs.
For me you can continue as you want selling the stuff, it's not my problem.

"Promoting Carl's, Skeptic mockery of others to cover up your own ignorance is a poor excuse for being closed minded to reality and the truth. Dell"

Cover up of my ignorance ??? About what ???
Closed minded ???
Oh you refer at LRLs fantasies and story-telling ??? Maybe... but I'm improving my knowledge reading your posts...

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Consider the ground when you look for ways to build a working LRL

We have taken a look at the earth's atmosphere and it's electric charge that is generated by the sun. We know that there is an average of 2000 amps of current flowing between the earth and the atmosphere, about half in the form of lightning, and half leaking slowly through the air. In the fair weather skies, the electric field gradient follows the contour of the land. We see the high mountains have more current leaking in the atmosphere than neighboring areas of low elevation, because the mountains are closer to the source of charge, and have less distance for the current to travel. These mountains form a voltage gradient anomaly compared to uniform neighboring flat areas at sea level. We also see anomalies from other artificial objects on the ground such as tall buildings, electric and radio towers, and just about anything tall connected to the ground. These objects all create an anomaly in the current leakage through the air as well as an anomaly in the electric field gradient. But what about the ground? If we look beyond the obvious topographic anomalies, is all ground equal when it interacts with the atmospheric field and currents? Do we find a uniform ground that has no anomalies except for the contour changes?

Anomalies on the ground
We already know there are differences in ground resistivity because of different soil composition, as well as a large number of things that contaminate the surface in the area where it contacts the atmosphere. The soil conductivity can be expected to change as the ground water changes, as well as the variations in minerals and vegetation that is found at the surface. Most plants contain enough moisture to act as a conductor that is seen as ground potential by the 100v/meter electric charge in the air. Thus we might expect a tall tree to create a local variation in the electric field gradient, pushing it upward. We can also expect to find higher current flow through the tree, considering the amount of moisture and chemical activity in most plant leaves.

Plant anomalies below the ground
In addition to these anomalies expected on the surface of the ground, there are some fairly obvious anomalies just below the surface. The same tree we see 30 feet tall at the surface can have a root system an equal size below the surface. An examination of the roots will show they concentrate water and certain ions caused by chemical actions within the plant. So if there is a large root system in the soil, we would expect it to have water content that is usually more than the surrounding soil, as well as internal electrochemical activity. Depending on the shape of the root system this can have a number of measurable effects when surveying a plot of land. Consider also, many smaller plants grow in fields whereby the field is covered in a continuous root system that extends to a known depth, such as wild grass, and other heavy ground cover plants. These could have a tendency to mask some of the larger plant root systems, depending on the method of measurement. Also consider certain plants in relatively dry soil can send out roots that extend horizontally for miles. These can be thought of as conductors buried in the less conductive soil. We also usually find microbal chemical action around the roots of plants. It seems the existence of plants is enough to complicate the detection of any ions in the ground from long-time buried metals. But there is a lot more going on beneath the ground.

Geological anomalies below the ground
There are sub-surface geological features well known to geologists caused by long time movements in the earth's crust including fractures, faults, cuts, folds and other features where the rock composition changes drastically. Along with the changes in rock structure, we find changes in resistivity and other measurable properties. But we also see underground water flows that follow some of these transition areas such as fractures and faults. This is where we can expect larger variations in conductivity below the surface.

Telluric currents
One interesting phenomenon below the surface is a current flow that is generated in the earth's crust and mantle by changes in the earth's magnetic field. These currents are called telluric currents. They are generated by interactions between the solar wind and the magnetosphere, or solar radiation effects on the ionosphere. These telluric current flows also happen when lightning discharges at the earth's surface. These telluric currents flow from the magnetic poles to the equator in daylight parts of the globe, while moving in the opposite direction at the dark parts of the globe. The amount of current flowing at any one time is enough to power telegraphs that were used in the USA begining in 1859. These were later abandoned for batteries in order to obtain a constant power source. Telluric currents vary between 0.2 to 1000 volts/meter. The estimated current in a hemisphere during 12 hours is 100 to 1000 amps.

These telluric currents create corrosion problems for pipelines, which are now protected by cathodic protection circuitry. Both the telluric and magnetotelluric methods are useful to industrial prospectors who use them for exploring the structure beneath the Earth's surface. These are popular methods for exploration of geothermal fields, petroleum reservoirs, fault zones, ground water, conductive ore bodies, magma chambers, and plate tectonic boundaries.

Magnetotellucics
In magnetotellurics, the Earth's naturally varying electric and magnetic fields are measured over a wide range of frequencies (1/10,000 to 10,000 Hz). While the low frequencies are caused by solar wind and ionosphere charging, worldwide thunderstorm activity causes magnetic fields at frequencies above 1 Hz. These natural phenomena create strong magnetotelluric source signals over the entire frequency spectrum.

The ratio of the electric field to magnetic field can give simple information about the subsurface conductivity. Because of the skin effect phenomenon that affects electromagnetic fields, the ratio at higher frequency ranges gives information on the shallow Earth, whereas deeper information is provided by the low-frequency range. The ratio is usually represented as magnetotelluric-apparent resistivity and phase as a function of frequency. With recent advances in instrumentation, processing and modeling, magnetotellurics is now considered one of the most important tools in deep Earth research.

But how can this help a treasure hunter?
Can magnetotelluric measurements help a treasure hunter? It probably could if the treasure hunter was also a geologist who knew how to interpret a survey and determine what false signals to ignore. But most treasure hunters are not geologists. When we think of ways this technology would apply to treasure hunting, it has more to do with the telluric/magnetotelluric interactions with other phenomena occurring at the surface. For example, consider a large area of land with a telluric voltage trying to move toward the equator and has a fracture in the bedrock below the surface. Let's assume some amount of ground water is in the fracture that contains dissolved ions from local minerals, and is considered a relatively good conductor compared to the rock strata for miles around. We can expect a very large flow of telluric current in this fracture filled with water, compared to the surrounding dry rock strata. This can be expected to show some weak electric consequences at the surface. More important is the influence from worldwide thunderstorms that can cause some measurable frequeny components that reach the surface and are easily measured by geologists. These same radiated frequencies are measurable at the surface by non-geologists. Do they propogate into the air? Are these signals able to be picked up with sensing coils or antennas? More importantly, can these signals have an influence on existing radio signals that are broadcast in the air in the nearby vicinity so someone with a receiver can detect the magnetotelluric signal influencing his reception of the broadcast signal?

Now we know what happens when these underground currents find areas of highly conductive soil or underground water. And what happens when these currents find underground root systems? Do you suppose the currents might flow through the roots more easily than the surrounding soil? Could this cause a false reading to someone who didn't know to compensate for the underground water and plants?

And what happens when these currents travel laterally across a tall column of soil that has a trace of metal ions dissolved in it? Do you suppose you would find an anomaly measurable at the surface as well as some dynamic activity with the ions below?

Is this all there is?
These are only a few of the things we should consider when looking under the ground for physical phenomena that can help or hinder the development of an electronic LRL. There are some other interesting subterranean observations that are beyond the scope of the telluric currents and anomalies, but these will have to wait for another time.

Best wishes,
J_P

[gold24h]

Mining companys have proven ways to locate ore at distances,but i do not beleive the same devices would work on a small treasure or handfull of coins.The pistel like locaters that we have seen pictures of in posts on this site from the 1980's,i beleive work,how good who knows.I beleive they transmit a signal and receive a different signal,but what do they transmit and what do they receive,if we new those two we could build one,we know part of the units use BFO occilater,does anybody know what it transmits and receives?

[Seden]

Man I'm going to have to print out and save the two excellent treatises you've done lately,that's ALOT of work. And in both you've made some valid points and observations that Max,myself and others can put to use.

Since audio spectrum analyzer software is available for free, the next step would be to bury a non-ferrous object in between 2 ground rods and with some experimenting come up with a low noise amp with the right kind of signal processing to be able to discern the presence of the metallic object. Then once that is accomplished move on to using a resonant or non-resonant coil antenna and repeat the above experiment and go from there. The trick is going to be in coming up with the best signal processing for the noise.

Randy

[J_Player]

Hi Seden,

If you want to do some experimenting with earth resistivity without spending a fortune, here is a link that shows some simple testing equipment you can whip up: http://www.liv.ac.uk/Geomagnetism/schools/res.htm

The methods shown could also be used to experiment with induced polarization after some modifications. Also, the electronics to measure telluric frequencies and their phase shifts is a little more complicated, but probably nothing you can't handle.

If you want a hint about some of the ongoing experimentation described in this forum, I would also suggest looking into some of the old "tuned radio frequency" receivers that were used years ago, as well as the BFO metal detectors. The working hand-held LRLs are not measuring only anomalies from the soil, they are attempting to find special anomalies that cause a pair of coils to deviate from resonance. If you recall, resonant circuits are generally much more sensitive than off-resonant, but much harder to keep stable. The very principles that cause the instability will allow smaller anomalies to be sensed.

Keep in mind also that to sense an anomaly is only the first of 3 stages. After finding a way to locate anomalies, you must learn to identify buried metal anomalies as opposed to anomalies from other causes. After locating buried metals, the final task is to discriminate which metal. The methods to accomplish these are all contained within the geophysics of buried metals and the physical phenomena that surround these metals. You may need to use more than simple radio signal strength detection in order to arrive at the final objective of true long range locating. My opinion is there are some techniques of locating much more efficient than those that have been described in this forum so far.

It's nice to hear you like to read what I posted. I have been compiling some of my posts along with a number of others made by esteban and others into a html file that preserves all the information and pictures, but without the argumentative posts in between. When I finish this series of discussions, I will post the full html document in a zip file to download for those who are interested.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Consider the ground when you look for ways to build a working LRL

We have taken a look at the earth's atmosphere and it's electric charge that is generated by the sun. We know that there is an average of 2000 amps of current flowing between the earth and the atmosphere, about half in the form of lightning, and half leaking slowly through the air. In the fair weather skies, the electric field gradient follows the contour of the land. We see the high mountains have more current leaking in the atmosphere than neighboring areas of low elevation, because the mountains are closer to the source of charge, and have less distance for the current to travel. These mountains form a voltage gradient anomaly compared to uniform neighboring flat areas at sea level. We also see anomalies from other artificial objects on the ground such as tall buildings, electric and radio towers, and just about anything tall connected to the ground. These objects all create an anomaly in the current leakage through the air as well as an anomaly in the electric field gradient. But what about the ground? If we look beyond the obvious topographic anomalies, is all ground equal when it interacts with the atmospheric field and currents? Do we find a uniform ground that has no anomalies except for the contour changes?

Anomalies on the ground
We already know there are differences in ground resistivity because of different soil composition, as well as a large number of things that contaminate the surface in the area where it contacts the atmosphere. The soil conductivity can be expected to change as the ground water changes, as well as the variations in minerals and vegetation that is found at the surface. Most plants contain enough moisture to act as a conductor that is seen as ground potential by the 100v/meter electric charge in the air. Thus we might expect a tall tree to create a local variation in the electric field gradient, pushing it upward. We can also expect to find higher current flow through the tree, considering the amount of moisture and chemical activity in most plant leaves.

Plant anomalies below the ground
In addition to these anomalies expected on the surface of the ground, there are some fairly obvious anomalies just below the surface. The same tree we see 30 feet tall at the surface can have a root system an equal size below the surface. An examination of the roots will show they concentrate water and certain ions caused by chemical actions within the plant. So if there is a large root system in the soil, we would expect it to have water content that is usually more than the surrounding soil, as well as internal electrochemical activity. Depending on the shape of the root system this can have a number of measurable effects when surveying a plot of land. Consider also, many smaller plants grow in fields whereby the field is covered in a continuous root system that extends to a known depth, such as wild grass, and other heavy ground cover plants. These could have a tendency to mask some of the larger plant root systems, depending on the method of measurement. Also consider certain plants in relatively dry soil can send out roots that extend horizontally for miles. These can be thought of as conductors buried in the less conductive soil. We also usually find microbal chemical action around the roots of plants. It seems the existence of plants is enough to complicate the detection of any ions in the ground from long-time buried metals. But there is a lot more going on beneath the ground.

Geological anomalies below the ground
There are sub-surface geological features well known to geologists caused by long time movements in the earth's crust including fractures, faults, cuts, folds and other features where the rock composition changes drastically. Along with the changes in rock structure, we find changes in resistivity and other measurable properties. But we also see underground water flows that follow some of these transition areas such as fractures and faults. This is where we can expect larger variations in conductivity below the surface.

Telluric currents
One interesting phenomenon below the surface is a current flow that is generated in the earth's crust and mantle by changes in the earth's magnetic field. These currents are called telluric currents. They are generated by interactions between the solar wind and the magnetosphere, or solar radiation effects on the ionosphere. These telluric current flows also happen when lightning discharges at the earth's surface. These telluric currents flow from the magnetic poles to the equator in daylight parts of the globe, while moving in the opposite direction at the dark parts of the globe. The amount of current flowing at any one time is enough to power telegraphs that were used in the USA begining in 1859. These were later abandoned for batteries in order to obtain a constant power source. Telluric currents vary between 0.2 to 1000 volts/meter. The estimated current in a hemisphere during 12 hours is 100 to 1000 amps.

These telluric currents create corrosion problems for pipelines, which are now protected by cathodic protection circuitry. Both the telluric and magnetotelluric methods are useful to industrial prospectors who use them for exploring the structure beneath the Earth's surface. These are popular methods for exploration of geothermal fields, petroleum reservoirs, fault zones, ground water, conductive ore bodies, magma chambers, and plate tectonic boundaries.

Magnetotellucics
In magnetotellurics, the Earth's naturally varying electric and magnetic fields are measured over a wide range of frequencies (1/10,000 to 10,000 Hz). While the low frequencies are caused by solar wind and ionosphere charging, worldwide thunderstorm activity causes magnetic fields at frequencies above 1 Hz. These natural phenomena create strong magnetotelluric source signals over the entire frequency spectrum.

The ratio of the electric field to magnetic field can give simple information about the subsurface conductivity. Because of the skin effect phenomenon that affects electromagnetic fields, the ratio at higher frequency ranges gives information on the shallow Earth, whereas deeper information is provided by the low-frequency range. The ratio is usually represented as magnetotelluric-apparent resistivity and phase as a function of frequency. With recent advances in instrumentation, processing and modeling, magnetotellurics is now considered one of the most important tools in deep Earth research.

But how can this help a treasure hunter?
Can magnetotelluric measurements help a treasure hunter? It probably could if the treasure hunter was also a geologist who knew how to interpret a survey and determine what false signals to ignore. But most treasure hunters are not geologists. When we think of ways this technology would apply to treasure hunting, it has more to do with the telluric/magnetotelluric interactions with other phenomena occurring at the surface. For example, consider a large area of land with a telluric voltage trying to move toward the equator and has a fracture in the bedrock below the surface. Let's assume some amount of ground water is in the fracture that contains dissolved ions from local minerals, and is considered a relatively good conductor compared to the rock strata for miles around. We can expect a very large flow of telluric current in this fracture filled with water, compared to the surrounding dry rock strata. This can be expected to show some weak electric consequences at the surface. More important is the influence from worldwide thunderstorms that can cause some measurable frequeny components that reach the surface and are easily measured by geologists. These same radiated frequencies are measurable at the surface by non-geologists. Do they propogate into the air? Are these signals able to be picked up with sensing coils or antennas? More importantly, can these signals have an influence on existing radio signals that are broadcast in the air in the nearby vicinity so someone with a receiver can detect the magnetotelluric signal influencing his reception of the broadcast signal?

Now we know what happens when these underground currents find areas of highly conductive soil or underground water. And what happens when these currents find underground root systems? Do you suppose the currents might flow through the roots more easily than the surrounding soil? Could this cause a false reading to someone who didn't know to compensate for the underground water and plants?

And what happens when these currents travel laterally across a tall column of soil that has a trace of metal ions dissolved in it? Do you suppose you would find an anomaly measurable at the surface as well as some dynamic activity with the ions below?

Is this all there is?
These are only a few of the things we should consider when looking under the ground for physical phenomena that can help or hinder the development of an electronic LRL. There are some other interesting subterranean observations that are beyond the scope of the telluric currents and anomalies, but these will have to wait for another time.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
read all your "treatise on natural philosophy"...
yes these are scientific arguments. Fine.

It's the question that makes me crazy...

But how can this help a treasure hunter?

That's the problem... even thousands billions of neutrinos pass the Earth at any second... BUT THEN ?

I can find many other "sources" like these... AND THEN ?

Can't see any useful way in what you exposed to realize an electronic TH LRL.

Telluric currents ???

Yes they are... smaller and smaller amounts of electrons flowing that way...
AND SO ?

How e.g. neutrinos or telluric currents can show you where the gold is... ???

That's the point.

You miss the most important part. Explain us wich kind of interactions from these facts to e.g. a gold item could be... then the way of detectiong it by a remote electronic device.

That's the real question... which one of this of above you would use to electronically detect gold from remote ?

Otherwise is just another LRL BLA BLA BLA... that give us nothing more than what we can read on some geology magazine... sitting in the bathroom.

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

Again, the answer to the question that makes you crazy... "But how can this help a treasure hunter?" can only be found by reading the answers. In order to know the answer in full detail, you must read how the average geologist uses his instrument to measure the telluric currents and magnetotelluric currents. Then also read to lean how he looks at the data he finds and is able to locate underground faults, water and ore deposits. A good place to start is to type in google: magnetotelluric gold. If you don't have time to read these things, then this information will never do you any good, and there is no point in your further reading or making posts about what I write.

When it comes to treasure hunting, there are several prerequisites that must be satisfied before you can hope to gain any benefit from knowing the principles of earth science that I have talked about. some of the more important prerequisites are:

1. You must possess an intellect sufficient to grasp the implications of the physical phenomena that you read about, and how they may work together in order to produce measurable signals.

2. You must possess a comprehension of the English language sufficient to understand any subtle meanings that may be found in the text.

3. You must make a decision to try to learn the answers by taking the information at hand and connecting the different principles together to form some useful conclusions. Keep in mind, there are more principles involved than the ones I talk about.

Then proceed to collect more details that I have not talked about to complete your understanding of what might work. Without making the decision to try to learn, you will be left only with the decision to give up and try to make stupid jokes. While this choice is not all bad, it has the effect of causing others to view you as a stupid person. You wouldn't want that, would you? After all, you can't be stupid if you can build metal detector circuits, and even modify them to work better than the manufacturer designed it, right?

You can continue your stupid laughter about telluric currents not capable of locating gold, or you can read some real reports where geologists explain how they locate gold using magnetotelluric methods. I don't rally care, cause it's not my job to drag you in front of pages that shows you the answers and force you to learn things you do not want to know. The cost of knowledge is education. You can educate yourself or remain ignorant. This is your choice, not mine.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Max,

Again, the answer to the question that makes you crazy... "But how can this help a treasure hunter?" can only be found by reading the answers. In order to know the answer in full detail, you must read how the average geologist uses his instrument to measure the telluric currents and magnetotelluric currents. Then also read to lean how he looks at the data he finds and is able to locate underground faults, water and ore deposits. A good place to start is to type in google: magnetotelluric gold. If you don't have time to read these things, then this information will never do you any good, and there is no point in your further reading or making posts about what I write.

When it comes to treasure hunting, there are several prerequisites that must be satisfied before you can hope to gain any benefit from knowing the principles of earth science that I have talked about. some of the more important prerequisites are:

1. You must possess an intellect sufficient to grasp the implications of the physical phenomena that you read about, and how they may work together in order to produce measurable signals.

2. You must possess a comprehension of the English language sufficient to understand any subtle meanings that may be found in the text.

3. You must make a decision to try to learn the answers by taking the information at hand and connecting the different principles together to form some useful conclusions. Keep in mind, there are more principles involved than the ones I talk about.

Then proceed to collect more details that I have not talked about to complete your understanding of what might work. Without making the decision to try to learn, you will be left only with the decision to give up and try to make stupid jokes. While this choice is not all bad, it has the effect of causing others to view you as a stupid person. You wouldn't want that, would you? After all, you can't be stupid if you can build metal detector circuits, and even modify them to work better than the manufacturer designed it, right?

You can continue your stupid laughter about telluric currents not capable of locating gold, or you can read some real reports where geologists explain how they locate gold using magnetotelluric methods. I don't rally care, cause it's not my job to drag you in front of pages that shows you the answers and force you to learn things you do not want to know. The cost of knowledge is education. You can educate yourself or remain ignorant. This is your choice, not mine.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi,
only thing that I understand from your "papers" is that you think possible detecting e.g. gold items with a just electronic LRL... but don't say HOW!

You talk of telluric currents and other things... that could interest a geologist but don't tell me or us... how you realized your LRL. So what principle of operation (or principles if more than one) is.
That's all.

Anyone, even with a middle understanding of english and some hi-school education, can post exactly what you posted here.
Find on google "magnetotelluric gold".

So what do you offer more than e.g. Esteban ?

To me, nothing.

You cannot prove anything.

Are you looking for a petroleum reservoir ??? If so your "theories" are fine.
There are already applications of that.

Are you looking for a gold treasure ? If so your "theories" mean nothing, like Esteban's burned schematics.

That's your problem.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

You are saying stupid things again.

Originally Posted by Max

You cannot prove anything.

You pretend I am trying to prove something? But you know I am not. I told you in my post above exactly what my purpose is: "I have no interest in trying to prove to you that there are methods of locating buried metals at long range. My objective is to provide some real science involved with buried metals that can be demonstrated and proven by thousands of pages of research." Scroll up to my posts above and read it.

Originally Posted by Max

So what do you offer more than e.g. Esteban ? To me, nothing.

You are correct. There is nothing of value for you here. You may as well ignore my posts because they contain no useful information for you.

Originally Posted by Max

Are you looking for a gold treasure ? If so your "theories" mean nothing, like Esteban's burned schematics.

Again, I told you this is not my purpose. I guess you are either too stupid to read my answers or maybe too lazy. My purpose is to provide some real science involved with buried metals (read the post above).

Originally Posted by Max

That's your problem.

WRONG! It is not my problem. It has never been my problem to perform research or provide schematics for your benefit. If you don't know what you want to know about locating treasures, it is your problem, not mine. Remember, you have no power over me whatsoever. Nothing you say or do can cause me to perform the tasks you demand. You can't coerce me to do your thinking for you even in the slightest. You can't coerce me to locate test results and research that you are too lazy to read for yourself. I think the same is true for esteban and anyone else who you tried to characterize as useless because they won't perform as you demand.
In case you haven't figured it out, I owe you nothing. Not even the explanation I just typed.

Nice try Max, but you may as well give up. Your tricks won't work on me because I just don't care.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi,
you talk about "particular" science involved with buried metals... like I can talk of aliens on Mars... same thing.

No relevance to electronic LRL.
What's the relevance ?

You said you've a working electronic LRL not I.

I'm interested in your claim: that thing... not geological magazines.

JP if you don't want post relevant informations here is fine for me.

I haven't any problem with you... or with Esteban.

But when someone claim something , that he had, that it work, that he designed... realized... it's clear that there is the intention of communicate to the world that YES, COULD BE DONE ! YES, I'HAVE DONE ! YES IT WORKS ! EUREKA !

Or not ?

THEN (logic said me)

Why you posted here that you have a working electronic LRL ?

Now you don't want give proofs... schematics... even the principle of operation... NOTHING.

Why you posted here that you have a working electronic LRL ?
And then become silent ?

Also Esteban and others do the same:
-they claim LRL are working
-then they don't give any explaination, anything useful to understand is possible for real or not and HOW

Why people must belive what you said (that you have a working LRL) and don't belive Esteban or others, if, at the end, YOU ACT SAME WAY ?

Just cause you post some articles here ?

My advice is, assuming you have a working LRL like you said, to partecipate to the LRL Challenge and win the jackpot, proving that I'm wrong !

This way you can demonstrate that your LRL work for real, without the need of giving to the public your discovery details.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

You forget. You have the problem, not me. I don't have to prove anything to you. You can whine all you want, but you can't coerce me to perform per your demands and you can't stop me from accomplishing my objective.

Your tricks still didn't work. Now what will you do?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Max,

You forget. You have the problem, not me. I don't have to prove anything to you. You can whine all you want, but you can't coerce me to perform per your demands and you can't stop me from accomplishing my objective.

Your tricks still didn't work. Now what will you do?

Best wishes,
J_P

Originally Posted by Max

Why you posted here that you have a working electronic LRL ?

Now you don't want give proofs... schematics... even the principle of operation... NOTHING.

Why you posted here that you have a working electronic LRL ?
And then become silent ?

Hi J_Player,

With all this bickering going on, I've become a little confused. I don't recall anywhere that you claimed to have a working LRL.
Is this true, or not?

[Max]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

Hi J_Player,

With all this bickering going on, I've become a little confused. I don't recall anywhere that you claimed to have a working LRL.
Is this true, or not?

Hi,
well he said something bit by bit... so take your conclusion like I have done.

he wrote:
"... If you recall, I already posted long ago that if I had a working LRL, I would not be talking about it in this forum, so you can forget about seeing any LRL schematics from me. "

But before that he wrote about the fact he has seen and used one/more working LRL built by "someone". A real demonstration of a working LRL.

he wrote:
"I've never seen a LRL available for sale on the open market demonstrated to work, but I have seen and used a couple of LRLs built and owned by private individuals that worked like the builders said they would (these are not for sale). "

and also he wrote:
"They located from a long range beyond the reach of any metal detector. The point is they are not available for anyone to buy on the open market. The only LRLs for sale on the open market cannot be demonstrated to work.

Think about it. Suppose you had an electronic instrument that located metal objects in a certain weight range and discriminated, from a range of over 50 feet. If this detector worked every time regardless of weather, and solar conditions, would you rush out and try to sell it? Wouldn't you quietly go treasure hunting and hope nobody found out about your treasure or your locator? What reason would an inventor of a working electronic LRL have to manufacture and sell it? Can you think of a reason?
"

So who knows !? Maybe he hasn't it and is just a witness of something... or maybe he has one device or schematic/design and don't wanna post here... say nothing more.Or he's just bluffing like others.

After the last message where he wrote about the fact he'll never post a schematic anyway... I've made 2+2. But maybe I'm wrong.
Don't know.

What's sure is that he strongly belive that a just-electronic-LRL work detecting metals from a range beyond conventional MDs possibilities.

It's a big claim... even saying that he has just seen or used a couple of working LRLs for real, and that they worked truly. Even if he hasn't any schematic or unit.

Just that fact is a big claim for me.

Anyway, just to explain you why I asked him to post some useful information about... and not articles from magazines.

Best regards,
Max