DIODES QUESTION

[Esteban]

Regarding diode/s in another thread (about Ranger T.).

I made a detector via microvolt amp for distance, with this input I detect a silver adorn (pidgeon) 40 or more meter, but is not at high depth. Also treasure of silver cavalry and spoons, etc., 80 m distance buried at 90 cm depth, two copper clips for batteries car, and many other objects as coins, also part of official (militar) clothe (gold threads!). When I use 4 diodes in serie the difference was notorious, this four Ge diodes (selected, small leakage) make big difference. The only problem I have here is hot temperature wich cause deviation in this system transistors array CA 3046. This was BIG discovery made myself in the end of the 80s. Common duplicator or quadruplier with capacitors DOESN'T WORK. DIRECTLY DOESN'T WORK. This work as "natural" quadriplier, but don't know why... Note that the diodes was added after due many experiments. Sensor as 3 antennas, the center switched, the extremes 2 to mass unbalanced via 560 and 680 ohms resistors. My first find was in my home, a burn 7805 IC, green by the "antiquity" at 10 meters distance. Was because the metalic dissipator is copper...

This is just first stage of the detector. R1/R3 is 2,000, this is the amplificative factor. Detect a 1 uV in input. This is part of my old paper. There are important details in input sensor, don't showing here... SORRY FOR TO POST HERE, NOT IN YOUR MOCKERY SECTION CALLED REMOTE SENSING.

[Esteban]

Here a sample. Also try with 6 diodes, no many differences... One of the system uses a 90 pF 5 KV ceramic cap.

[Götz von Berlichingen]

OK. Whats the Theory behind this Detector ?

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Götz von Berlichingen

OK. Whats the Theory behind this Detector ?

Yes, it would be interesting to know what your detector is sensing from the target in the distance.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Götz von Berlichingen

OK. Whats the Theory behind this Detector ?

The voltage surrounding good conductive metals buried for many years.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Esteban

The voltage surrounding good conductive metals buried for many years.

Voltage is defined as the difference of electrical potential between two points of an electrical or electronic circuit, expressed in volts.

If the "good conductive metal" is one point (Point a), where or what constitutes the other point (Point b)?

[Götz von Berlichingen]

I guess a rotten piece of Metal could act like a Galvanic Element (Battery) in humid Ground - but i dont understand how this could be Detected at a Distance.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Theseus

Voltage is defined as the difference of electrical potential between two points of an electrical or electronic circuit, expressed in volts.

If the "good conductive metal" is one point (Point a), where or what constitutes the other point (Point b)?

I Assume the antenna of this arrangament is the other electrode.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Esteban

I Assume the antenna of this arrangament is the other electrode.

I kind of wondered if this was the essence of your arrangement. Then, if the metal is buried in the ground, is the antenna touching the ground, at some distance from the buried metal?

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Theseus

I kind of wondered if this was the essence of your arrangement. Then, if the metal is buried in the ground, is the antenna touching the ground, at some distance from the buried metal?

In essence the person touch the soil via his own resistence.

In some part there is a drawing made by me.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Esteban

In essence the person touch the soil via his own resistence.

In some part there is a drawing made by me.

But if the antenna is the remote electrode in your voltage measuring circuit, then is it making connections through the air, back to the other measuring point?

If so, then calling this a voltage measurement is probably a misnomer, in the strictest sense of the accepted definition of the word voltage. I'm not sure exactly what to call it, but it does not seem to fit the definition of voltage very well.

Do you imagine this phenomenon to be around the buried metal as some type of field; and would it be strictly electrical in nature, or does it have an electrochemical component?

Also, have you verified the existence of this phenomenon with ordinary conventional instrumentation, and if so; how did you measure it?

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Theseus

But if the antenna is the remote electrode in your voltage measuring circuit, then is it making connections through the air, back to the other measuring point?

If so, then calling this a voltage measurement is probably a misnomer, in the strictest sense of the accepted definition of the word voltage. I'm not sure exactly what to call it, but it does not seem to fit the definition of voltage very well.

Do you imagine this phenomenon to be around the buried metal as some type of field; and would it be strictly electrical in nature, or does it have an electrochemical component?

Also, have you verified the existence of this phenomenon with ordinary conventional instrumentation, and if so; how did you measure it?

I use voltage because during detection increases the voltage in the detector circuit. Also must be electromagnetic and RF associated, because many methods I used was positive in most or minus grade. And maybe has electrochemical component by the corrossion. But gold presents low or no presents corrossion, but I think a kind of electrical field. I think this acts as a battery in the soil.

You can check with a simple 100 microamp meter type "needle" in situ, well remarcable over big old targets.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Esteban

I use voltage because during detection increases the voltage in the detector circuit. Also must be electromagnetic and RF associated, because many methods I used was positive in most or minus grade. And maybe has electrochemical component by the corrossion. But gold presents low or no presents corrossion, but I think a kind of electrical field. I think this acts as a battery in the soil.

You can check with a simple 100 microamp meter type "needle" in situ, well remarcable over big old targets.

Okay, I see why you refer to it as a voltage. The problem, for me and others, is that I have an education in electronics and physics, and when you use electrical terms that have definitions already defined in the sciences that I am familiar --then I try to apply the principles as I know them. This makes understanding your "theory" of what you believe is going on around metals in the ground, very confusing. I would like to understand your "theory" better, but it must be explained in new terms that are not related to known sciences --or with known terms that actually do apply.

It appears that perhaps what you believe is going on around buried metals is completely electrochemical in nature. If that is the case, then the air above the ground, where you are pointing your detectors, is not involved. Hence, there are no "voltages" to measure, or sense.

[Fred]

I remember seeing a radiation detector schematic where the sensor was diode(s) , but here a relatively high voltage were applied to the diodes, so the principle was similar to regular geiger tubes. This doesn´t seems to be the case here.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Theseus

Okay, I see why you refer to it as a voltage. The problem, for me and others, is that I have an education in electronics and physics, and when you use electrical terms that have definitions already defined in the sciences that I am familiar --then I try to apply the principles as I know them. This makes understanding your "theory" of what you believe is going on around metals in the ground, very confusing. I would like to understand your "theory" better, but it must be explained in new terms that are not related to known sciences --or with known terms that actually do apply.

It appears that perhaps what you believe is going on around buried metals is completely electrochemical in nature. If that is the case, then the air above the ground, where you are pointing your detectors, is not involved. Hence, there are no "voltages" to measure, or sense.

I understand! Sorry for can't explain scientifically. The results I obtain outdoor, no in the labo. So, maybe some phenomenons can't be replicate.

If isn't involved some part of electricity, why can be detectable via preamp prepared for detect this electrical/magnetic variations?

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Fred

I remember seeing a radiation detector schematic where the sensor was diode(s) , but here a relatively high voltage were applied to the diodes, so the principle was similar to regular geiger tubes. This doesn´t seems to be the case here.

No, isn't the case. But also I experiment with this type of circular antenna or loop, many years ago. But whit other type of circuit.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Esteban

I understand! Sorry for can't explain scientifically. The results I obtain outdoor, no in the labo. So, maybe some phenomenons can't be replicate.

If isn't involved some part of electricity, why can be detectable via preamp prepared for detect this electrical/magnetic variations?

First, I would agree that dissimilar metals, when in a suitable electrolyte (perhaps certain soils) could possibly enter into an electrochemical process where there is an exchange of ions between the two metals. But these paths of current and/or conduction do not leave or float around outside of the electrolyte. Also, if a voltmeter (probes) are touched to the separate metals, a difference of potential (voltage) will be measured. The potential difference will be as a result of how far the metals are away from each other in the Galvanic Series.

However, your devices involving preamps, amplifiers and various types of antennas connected to them, could very well be picking up all sorts of extraneous noise and/or signals from an entire gamut of sources ---none of which would necessarily be buried noble metals.

I appreciate your confidence in what you are doing, and what you are observing, but your claims are in direct conflict with basic physics, electronics and in particular wave propagation. I would have to personally observe what you are doing, and with what sort of apparatus before your theory of operation could be validated.

The theory and practice of Corrosion of Metals in hostile environments is a very well known science, with tried and true instruments and protocol to arrest corrosion of all sorts of metals. It is a practice built around the science of electrochemical processes that have been studied and researched for decades now. Certainly, if there were deviations from this very old science, involving ions leaving the metals and drifting into the ether where they might be measured or detected as voltages --we would have heard about it many years ago. The fact is, this phenomenon just doesn't occur.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Theseus

First, I would agree that dissimilar metals, when in a suitable electrolyte (perhaps certain soils) could possibly enter into an electrochemical process where there is an exchange of ions between the two metals. But these paths of current and/or conduction do not leave or float around outside of the electrolyte. Also, if a voltmeter (probes) are touched to the separate metals, a difference of potential (voltage) will be measured. The potential difference will be as a result of how far the metals are away from each other in the Galvanic Series.

However, your devices involving preamps, amplifiers and various types of antennas connected to them, could very well be picking up all sorts of extraneous noise and/or signals from an entire gamut of sources ---none of which would necessarily be buried noble metals.

I appreciate your confidence in what you are doing, and what you are observing, but your claims are in direct conflict with basic physics, electronics and in particular wave propagation. I would have to personally observe what you are doing, and with what sort of apparatus before your theory of operation could be validated.

The theory and practice of Corrosion of Metals in hostile environments is a very well known science, with tried and true instruments and protocol to arrest corrosion of all sorts of metals. It is a practice built around the science of electrochemical processes that have been studied and researched for decades now. Certainly, if there were deviations from this very old science, involving ions leaving the metals and drifting into the ether where they might be measured or detected as voltages --we would have heard about it many years ago. The fact is, this phenomenon just doesn't occur.

Ok, but is not coincidence when the antenna or the coil or IR light pick in an only point with much precission, and in the place is the good conductive metal. And not interference. After extraction of the item, the "signal" dissapears.

Of course, if isn't in the books will be appears out the understanding and of course collide with electronics and physics. In fact, I learn from other man with wich I found many items at distance, also with BFO and other stages.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Ok, but is not coincidence when the antenna or the coil or IR light pick in an only point with much precission, and in the place is the good conductive metal. And not interference. After extraction of the item, the "signal" dissapears.

Of course, if isn't in the books will be appears out the understanding and of course collide with electronics and physics. In fact, I learn from other man with wich I found many items at distance, also with BFO and other stages.

I respect your tenacity, but until I could experience for myself what exactly you are doing; I'll stick by the science of metal corrosion as I know it to be. The principles of metal corrosion are not limited to text books. There are real life examples of these processes all around us, and I have studied a great many varieties both in the lab and in the field.

Would you happen to have a video on YouTube, or anywhere that would show in detail what you are doing?

Incidentally, is your theory of operation like that expressed by the Mineoro group?

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Theseus

I respect your tenacity, but until I could experience for myself what exactly you are doing; I'll stick by the science of metal corrosion as I know it to be. The principles of metal corrosion are not limited to text books. There are real life examples of these processes all around us, and I have studied a great many varieties both in the lab and in the field.

Would you happen to have a video on YouTube, or anywhere that would show in detail what you are doing?

Incidentally, is your theory of operation like that expressed by the Mineoro group?

I'll make this video. The only I have are "tons" of pics since ends of 70s to today. Also many pics of trips in USA in 1981 and 1985.

Part of my "theory" I learn myself, part of other man, part is of Mineoro. But I try to find myself.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Esteban

I'll make this video. The only I have are "tons" of pics since ends of 70s to today. Also many pics of trips in USA in 1981 and 1985.

Part of my "theory" I learn myself, part of other man, part is of Mineoro. But I try to find myself.

The reason I asked if your theory was like that of Mineoro, is because I've studied their theory of operation (for their devices) and it is sadly lacking in basic credibility.

If only ions could float around and propagate as they explain, but the fact is they don't. I would be interested in seeing your video.