LongRangeLocators Forums  

Go Back   LongRangeLocators Forums > Main Forums > Long Range Locators

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 05-27-2009, 10:18 PM
Theseus's Avatar
Theseus Theseus is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well above sea level
Posts: 843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esteban View Post
Maybe this is not good site for to discuss it!
Or, maybe it is a perfectly logical site to discuss it, but there is no desire to discuss it at a level where real knowledge and details are provided.
__________________

The Wallet-Miner's Creed
Why bother with the truth, when it doesn't suit the argument?
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 05-28-2009, 02:30 AM
Esteban's Avatar
Esteban Esteban is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the Heart of South America
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clondike Clad View Post
I build many circuits and not one, NOT ONE.NOT ONE worked.
If you are like me you know HOW ELECTRONICS WORK.

You know as well as I do the BULL IS DEEP.
Now I will go back to lurking
Do you build many?

I build many and failed. I build many with success, but your persistence must be extraterrestrial. You must to think in things nobody think!
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 05-28-2009, 03:55 AM
J_Player's Avatar
J_Player J_Player is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 4,382
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esteban
I build many and failed. I build many with success, but your persistence must be extraterrestrial. You must to think in things nobody think!
Hi Esteban,
Your words are true. Your approach to building circuits for LRLs is not the same as most electronic engineers and experimenters would use. The people who use conventional methods will not have success with building your circuits because they are trying to design according to conventional designs, without considering the importance of the essential small signals that you look to capture. When Clondike Clad says "Not one worked", he is talking about other variations of LRL that he built from other people, not your designs. He does not have experience with using a radio receiver to monitor the audio frequency signal of an oscillator, (this method is not taught to experimenters, or in schools that teach electronics). I expect that people who cannot follow your instructions and build the circuitry as you described will not find success. The best they can do is to say the theories they were taught do not explain how your methods can work.

One problem with your previous posts is that you have not given a good description of the IR LED detector. I read your posts for IR metal detectors, and I see some confusing information. One example of confusing information is for the receiver. Here is what you previously explained about the receiver for the IR LED detector: "I think occurs a variation in height between the tone present in a receiver (this is filtrate as an interference in ANY sensitive system like a milivoltmeter). YOU DON'T NEED IR leds receiver. Also this filtrates in FM reveiver, and the signal of the target is directly in the beam or beams, no in the telescopic antenna, for example. But today maybe is not possible in this band (FM)".
http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showp...2&postcount=56

The words you posted give some information, but also makes a puzzle. What you posted tells us that the signal of the target is in the IR beam, not in a telescopic antenna, and can be heard on an FM receiver. But most portable FM radios use a telescopic antenna to receive their signals. This makes another puzzle of what to use for tuning the signal. When you say "today maybe is not possible in this band (FM)", This makes people think the FM will not work because you say maybe it is not possible, and the signal does not travel in the telescopic antenna. So they think maybe they must use AM for listening to the variation in the height of the tone that you say can be heard.

Also, you say there is a variation in the height between the tone present in the receiver. In English, this means the amplitude of the square wave is changing. But you later say that the phase is shifted. This is where you make the puzzle. Nobody knows what kind of change to look for... Amplitude or phase shift? Or maybe something else changed that Esteban did not tell us... maybe frequency? This makes some people think that a BFO detector will find the change, others think AM radio will detect the change of amplitude. Nobody knows what you have explained. This is not because they did not read your words. It is because your words are confusing. Many people would understand the IR LED detector if they had some clear explanation, but what you posted will lead most people to arrive at the wrong idea for how your IR LED detector works.

Best wishes,
J_P
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 05-28-2009, 08:15 AM
Max's Avatar
Max Max is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mars (cool)
Posts: 2,684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Player View Post
Hi Esteban,
Your words are true. Your approach to building circuits for LRLs is not the same as most electronic engineers and experimenters would use. The people who use conventional methods will not have success with building your circuits because they are trying to design according to conventional designs, without considering the importance of the essential small signals that you look to capture. When Clondike Clad says "Not one worked", he is talking about other variations of LRL that he built from other people, not your designs. He does not have experience with using a radio receiver to monitor the audio frequency signal of an oscillator, (this method is not taught to experimenters, or in schools that teach electronics). I expect that people who cannot follow your instructions and build the circuitry as you described will not find success. The best they can do is to say the theories they were taught do not explain how your methods can work.

One problem with your previous posts is that you have not given a good description of the IR LED detector. I read your posts for IR metal detectors, and I see some confusing information. One example of confusing information is for the receiver. Here is what you previously explained about the receiver for the IR LED detector: "I think occurs a variation in height between the tone present in a receiver (this is filtrate as an interference in ANY sensitive system like a milivoltmeter). YOU DON'T NEED IR leds receiver. Also this filtrates in FM reveiver, and the signal of the target is directly in the beam or beams, no in the telescopic antenna, for example. But today maybe is not possible in this band (FM)".
http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showp...2&postcount=56

The words you posted give some information, but also makes a puzzle. What you posted tells us that the signal of the target is in the IR beam, not in a telescopic antenna, and can be heard on an FM receiver. But most portable FM radios use a telescopic antenna to receive their signals. This makes another puzzle of what to use for tuning the signal. When you say "today maybe is not possible in this band (FM)", This makes people think the FM will not work because you say maybe it is not possible, and the signal does not travel in the telescopic antenna. So they think maybe they must use AM for listening to the variation in the height of the tone that you say can be heard.

Also, you say there is a variation in the height between the tone present in the receiver. In English, this means the amplitude of the square wave is changing. But you later say that the phase is shifted. This is where you make the puzzle. Nobody knows what kind of change to look for... Amplitude or phase shift? Or maybe something else changed that Esteban did not tell us... maybe frequency? This makes some people think that a BFO detector will find the change, others think AM radio will detect the change of amplitude. Nobody knows what you have explained. This is not because they did not read your words. It is because your words are confusing. Many people would understand the IR LED detector if they had some clear explanation, but what you posted will lead most people to arrive at the wrong idea for how your IR LED detector works.

Best wishes,
J_P
Hi,
yes, it's impossible replicate something that way... the key factors in such stuff are two:

1. understanding the theory or principle of operation
2. understanding how device is made to clone it without understanding theory

But from posts like above... you can't understand theory, nor you can't understand just how the device is made... so it's impossible make a clone of it... unless you'll discover something yourself during the process.

Now... if posts will be just pictures and confuse explainations nobody ever will make a perfect clone of that things... and nobody will understand anything.

That's cause this whole Remote Sensing forum is so subject to humor and comics... people don't understand... people can't verify anything...

What they (LRL guys) expect then from that context ???

Kind regards,
Max
__________________

"Kill for gain or shoot to maim...
But we dont need a reason
"

someone said...
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 05-28-2009, 10:09 AM
detectoman's Avatar
detectoman detectoman is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 935
Default

the esceptics have configured the mind in one different mode, so cant understand these simple things of the comun builders makers of lrl, may be too we cant build easy eg. one complex detector how headhammer of carl

es cosa curiosa que los escepticos no pueden construir un simple lrl, del cual se dan suficientes detalles, y es debido a la configuracion mental de ellos y su dificultad para entender el pensamiento objetivo, ellos los escepticos son diferentes como lo son los creyentes y los ateos
los ateos no pueden comprender A DIOS
for example i of children, always think possible build one machine for everything, and i understand the posibilite of build one lrl, may be others are negative to these posibilites
these is razon for difficult, because the configuration of the mind of EE is different to liricmakers
theist and atheist, is same what EE and lrlst
one lr detection video isnt, convincent for one scpetic
how , he st thomas' incredule
may be
best regards dman

Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 05-28-2009, 04:15 PM
Esteban's Avatar
Esteban Esteban is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the Heart of South America
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Player View Post
Hi Esteban,
Your words are true. Your approach to building circuits for LRLs is not the same as most electronic engineers and experimenters would use. The people who use conventional methods will not have success with building your circuits because they are trying to design according to conventional designs, without considering the importance of the essential small signals that you look to capture. When Clondike Clad says "Not one worked", he is talking about other variations of LRL that he built from other people, not your designs. He does not have experience with using a radio receiver to monitor the audio frequency signal of an oscillator, (this method is not taught to experimenters, or in schools that teach electronics). I expect that people who cannot follow your instructions and build the circuitry as you described will not find success. The best they can do is to say the theories they were taught do not explain how your methods can work.

One problem with your previous posts is that you have not given a good description of the IR LED detector. I read your posts for IR metal detectors, and I see some confusing information. One example of confusing information is for the receiver. Here is what you previously explained about the receiver for the IR LED detector: "I think occurs a variation in height between the tone present in a receiver (this is filtrate as an interference in ANY sensitive system like a milivoltmeter). YOU DON'T NEED IR leds receiver. Also this filtrates in FM reveiver, and the signal of the target is directly in the beam or beams, no in the telescopic antenna, for example. But today maybe is not possible in this band (FM)".
http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showp...2&postcount=56

The words you posted give some information, but also makes a puzzle. What you posted tells us that the signal of the target is in the IR beam, not in a telescopic antenna, and can be heard on an FM receiver. But most portable FM radios use a telescopic antenna to receive their signals. This makes another puzzle of what to use for tuning the signal. When you say "today maybe is not possible in this band (FM)", This makes people think the FM will not work because you say maybe it is not possible, and the signal does not travel in the telescopic antenna. So they think maybe they must use AM for listening to the variation in the height of the tone that you say can be heard.

Also, you say there is a variation in the height between the tone present in the receiver. In English, this means the amplitude of the square wave is changing. But you later say that the phase is shifted. This is where you make the puzzle. Nobody knows what kind of change to look for... Amplitude or phase shift? Or maybe something else changed that Esteban did not tell us... maybe frequency? This makes some people think that a BFO detector will find the change, others think AM radio will detect the change of amplitude. Nobody knows what you have explained. This is not because they did not read your words. It is because your words are confusing. Many people would understand the IR LED detector if they had some clear explanation, but what you posted will lead most people to arrive at the wrong idea for how your IR LED detector works.

Best wishes,
J_P
Maybe is not possible in conventional FM radio, but you can alterate the coil adding or sustracting turns in the FM tune coil. So you can use 80 to 86 Mhz or 109 to 112... Mhz, in a site free of commercial emissions.

Why radio? Because you have here amplifier stage and RF that facilitate experimentation.

I use the FM antenna. I connect a telescopic antenna via coax cable to 30 pF input FM antenna. The shield is used.

But I see that the detection come directly in the beam, because the target is in the direction of the beam, not in the antenna, but maybe antenna play a rol.

Some changes exists in the audio when target is detected. With it I detect various times objects at size of copper wire 2 mm diam, 0.5 cm long! but near. A bullet of 5.5 mm compressed air riffle at 1.5 m!

Can temperature associated to these items the factor wich alterates the pattern?

In AM radio, any spark, any movement, bla, bla, produce spurious beeps, so is not a candidate.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 05-28-2009, 07:43 PM
Esteban's Avatar
Esteban Esteban is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the Heart of South America
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esteban View Post
Maybe is not possible in conventional FM radio, but you can alterate the coil adding or sustracting turns in the FM tune coil. So you can use 80 to 86 Mhz or 109 to 112... Mhz, in a site free of commercial emissions.

Why radio? Because you have here amplifier stage and RF that facilitate experimentation.

I use the FM antenna. I connect a telescopic antenna via coax cable to 30 pF input FM antenna. The shield is used.

But I see that the detection come directly in the beam, because the target is in the direction of the beam, not in the antenna, but maybe antenna play a rol.

Some changes exists in the audio when target is detected. With it I detect various times objects at size of copper wire 2 mm diam, 0.5 cm long! but near. A bullet of 5.5 mm compressed air riffle at 1.5 m!

Can temperature associated to these items the factor wich alterates the pattern?

In AM radio, any spark, any movement, bla, bla, produce spurious beeps, so is not a candidate.
The red mean: part of these frequencies free of FM emissions.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 03-12-2011, 11:50 PM
taliesin's Avatar
taliesin taliesin is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: yes i do live there
Posts: 15
Default question to esteban

hi esteban do you take peyote by any chance ?
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 09-10-2024, 06:24 PM
Pahom Pahom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Россия
Posts: 247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taliesin View Post
hi esteban do you take peyote by any chance ?
you think that you tried cactus, I wonder what the other participants use then. If the registration increases every day?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.