discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrLs

[Oroblanco]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Well my sources disagree with you on this, and say flatly that gold has no resonant frequency, and one claims it is 5 khz.

J__P wrote

Hi Oroblanco,
Can you name your sources which disagree with the fact that the nuclear magnetic resonance frequency of buried gold is not in the megahertz range, and say the NMR frequeny of elements are not variable when the magnetic field is varied?

There are several online. Can you provide some source that claims otherwise?

Hi Oroblanco,

All of the sources say otherwise.
It is common knowledge for anyone working with NMR that the frequency depends on the magnetic field.
Check here to see all the sources: NMR FREQUENCIES
or check google for "NMR frequencies" to see all the sources.

This is why I am wondering about the several sources you referenced.
I have never seen these online sources that disagree.

Can you provide one of them?


Best wishes,
J_P

Here you are:

What is the Resonant frequency of gold?
There is no "resonant frequency" of gold.

<rest available at:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_Resonant_frequency_of_gold>

Now your evidence that there IS a resonant frequency for gold? The online sources have several different numbers assigned, without anything to substantiate them, and most appear to be sites that are promoters of LRL devices. Thank you in advance,

EDIT strike that repeated request, it is plain to see that no attempt is going to be made to address the subject of this thread, which was,
discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

and what has been posted have been a retrenchment of opposing camps, a lot of technobabble intended to impress or baffle with BS those with no training in electronics or physics. As much as I would love to read possible theories as was the subject, this is going nowhere.

Good luck and good hunting to you all, thank you for your participation, and I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Well my sources disagree with you on this, and say flatly that gold has no resonant frequency, and one claims it is 5 khz.

J__P wrote

Hi Oroblanco,
Can you name your sources which disagree with the fact that the nuclear magnetic resonance frequency of buried gold is not in the megahertz range, and say the NMR frequeny of elements are not variable when the magnetic field is varied?

There are several online. Can you provide some source that claims otherwise?

Hi Oroblanco,

All of the sources say otherwise.
It is common knowledge for anyone working with NMR that the frequency depends on the magnetic field.
Check here to see all the sources: NMR FREQUENCIES
or check google for "NMR frequencies" to see all the sources.

This is why I am wondering about the several sources you referenced.
I have never seen these online sources that disagree.

Can you provide one of them?


Best wishes,
J_P

Here you are:

What is the Resonant frequency of gold?
There is no "resonant frequency" of gold.

<rest available at:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_Resonant_frequency_of_gold>

Now your evidence that there IS a resonant frequency for gold? The online sources have several different numbers assigned, without anything to substantiate them, and most appear to be sites that are promoters of LRL devices. Thank you in advance,

EDIT strike that repeated request, it is plain to see that no attempt is going to be made to address the subject of this thread, which was,
discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

and what has been posted have been a retrenchment of opposing camps, a lot of technobabble intended to impress or baffle with BS those with no training in electronics or physics. As much as I would love to read possible theories as was the subject, this is going nowhere.

Good luck and good hunting to you all, thank you for your participation, and I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

Hi Oroblanco,

My evidence is that there are many nuclear magnetic resonant frequencies for gold, depending on what magnetic field it is in. This evidence is in the same link you posted.
The reference you posted confirms the NMR frequency of gold is dependent on the magnetic field applied, and it also confirms it is not an opposing camp. There have never been any oppposing camps about this fact that I know of. Not in this forum or in the scientific community. All sources I have seen agree that variable NMR frequencies depend on the magnetic field. I am not sure why you think there is disagreement. Your reference explains that there is no signal you can broadcast that will cause gold to resonate, and you want me to prove it wrong. I won't prove it's wrong because it's not wrong, and it has nothing to do with my discussion, nor did I never claim you can broadcast a signal to cause gold to resonate. My entire discussion referred only to nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). This is not a method to cause a substance to resonate. It involves finding a frequency where a substance will absorbe RF when placed under a magnetic field. In the NMR industry the frequency at which RF is absorbed in an element placed in different magnetic fields is usually called it's resonant frequency, or nuclear magnetic resonant frequency to be more exact. If you read my posts, it's pretty clear I was saying the NMR frequency is variable and depends on the magnetic field strength, just as we read in all the online references.

There are many tables showing various frequencies, but these are not unsubstantiated. They come from leading universities and research institutes.
The reason they publish several frequencies for the same element is because they are showing several frequencies to expect when putting a sample under different strength magnetic fields.

These organizations do not sell LRLs or anything else except education and research. Here are some examples:
Massachussets Institute of Technology: http://web.mit.edu/speclab/www/Facility/nmrfreq.html
Florida State University: http://nmr.magnet.fsu.edu/resources/nuclei/freq.htm
NYU: http://www.nyu.edu/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/aj39/NMRmap.cgi
There are hundreds more online sources which agree with these various NMR frequencies and use them for their laboratory studies in all aspects of NMR.

I really haven't found any disagreement with the published NMR frequencies anywhere online, or seen any arguments disputing these frequencies. I will presume these alleged online disagreeing sources don't exist until I see them. Until then we can rely on the information in the published NMR tables to help determine what theories may be applicable to LRLs.
I'm sorry you don't see it that way.


Best wishes,
J_P

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

<part extracted for brevity>
...I think we can also eliminate Dr Hung's preferred method of ionic detection of long time buried gold using LRLs claiming to have an ionic chamber of sorts, on the basis that the vapor pressure of gold is such that one could not possibly capture a gold ion with a hand
held artifact purporting to contain an ion chamber, simply because there is no gold vapor present.

What do you think?

<part extracted for brevity>
....By the way, the Mineoro Ionic Gold Detector, model IGD2005, lists the Power Source as: A sample of the material to be detected.

No Joke.

There are no batteries or power of any kind to it.
....

Hi Rudy and EE,

I forgot all about the Mineoro Ionic Gold Detector model IIGD2005. This is an early Mineoro product still sold which reminds me of the Dell rod.
I would call it a rod with a sample chamber. Strange they consider the sample to be a power source.
I have no idea how the chamber is ionic on this LRL, and Mineoro doesn't explain it.

But Mineoro did explain how the electronic version of their ion chamber works.
We can see what they had to say about it and determine if it is a possible theory that can be applicable to LRLs. So let's get right to it.....

When Mineoro released their electronic ion chamber LRLs they published some detailed explanations to tell how they work.
These explanations remained on their website for years until some heavy criticism appeared in online forums.
Today these pages are no longer on the Mineoro website, but they can still be read from online cached repositories.
Here is the part of their explanations that pertain to their ion chamber and to ionic detection:

​

According to Mineoro their "ion chambers" were intended to determine when gold was being deteced and ignore other materials. They were careful to call this process "classifying" while others would call it discriminating. Their explanation starts with describing a typical gold ion that might be in a gold treasure. The ions they are describing are ions that may form in an infitessimal amount like they do for any material when the charge becomes unbalanced due to subtle static electric variations or possibly chemical action at the surface.

Let's follow their Romeo and Juliet "love ion" explanation from a technical viewpoint.
Since these are single atoms rather than a large mass of gold ions, they quickly neutralize, which involves a tiny movement of current which they describe as electrical signal events which cause a "crashing" or tiny spark, which happens in nano, pico, atto and femto seconds, and that are detectable in sensitive electronics.

Their sensitive electronics includes the "Classifier" which consists of their "ion chamber" and the electronics that surround it intended to identify when the locator detects gold. They describe the actual chamber and a small loop antenna printed on the circuit board. They say the classifier is not just a filter, but a generator of positive ions and receiver of negative ions and generator of electrostatic. "Through electrostatics ions can walk long distances". See below for what this all looks like.

​

So how do these parts accomplish detecting and identifying gold electronically?
Here is a circuit diagram that shows exactly how it is done in one of their ionic chamber LRLs. All the supply voltages are regulated and filtered. You can see the ionic chamber is workng in conjunction with some other circuitry. I will let the electronic engineers figure it out before I make any comments of what I think is really happening in this circuit. This circuit can help us to determine whether Mineoro has a possible theory that may be applicable to LRLs. Be sure to note the sensitive electronics which process the femto second gold signals.

​

While some dismiss this ionic theory, it is one of the more prominent theories that has a lot of followers, so it may be worth examining to determine whether it has any merit, and why. There is a related theory from Mineoro which also became popular called ionic field theory, which should be probably treated separately becasue it is so big and involved. So I leave that part out for now until we have time to look over the detection end of their theory.

For the time being we can make a hypothetical assumption that some very few gold ions exist somewhere in the distance, possibly on the surface of a ring which is in a cup with a few drops of aqua regia on its surface that dissolved a small amount of gold. While the Mineoro factory doesn't require dissolving the gold for detection, we can we can add the aqua regia as an option if it helps to conceptualize there are some gold ions to detect.

Is this a workable ionic theory and method to accomplish long range detection?



Best wishes,
J_P

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

~Oroblanco~

Now your evidence that there IS a resonant frequency for gold? The online sources have several different numbers assigned, without anything to substantiate them, and most appear to be sites that are promoters of LRL devices. Thank you in advance,
EDIT strike that repeated request, it is plain to see that no attempt is going to be made to address the subject of this thread, which was,
discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's and what has been posted have been a retrenchment of opposing camps, a lot of technobabble intended to impress or baffle with BS those with no training in electronics or physics. As much as I would love to read possible theories as was the subject, this is going nowhere.
Good luck and good hunting to you all, thank you for your participation, and I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

Hey Oroblanco..Thank You for stopping by.. a lot of technobabble intended to impress or baffle with BS those with no training in electronics or physics. As much as I would love to read possible theories as was the subject, this is going nowhere.
Great statements as always…With all your experience as a Gold Miner/Prospector and Treasure Hunter you can recognize just who is a B/S’er and who are real Treasure Hunters…Art

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

~Oroblanco~

Now your evidence that there IS a resonant frequency for gold? The online sources have several different numbers assigned, without anything to substantiate them, and most appear to be sites that are promoters of LRL devices. Thank you in advance,
EDIT strike that repeated request, it is plain to see that no attempt is going to be made to address the subject of this thread, which was,
discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's and what has been posted have been a retrenchment of opposing camps, a lot of technobabble intended to impress or baffle with BS those with no training in electronics or physics. As much as I would love to read possible theories as was the subject, this is going nowhere.
Good luck and good hunting to you all, thank you for your participation, and I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

Hey Oroblanco..Thank You for stopping by.. a lot of technobabble intended to impress or baffle with BS those with no training in electronics or physics. As much as I would love to read possible theories as was the subject, this is going nowhere.
Great statements as always…With all your experience as a Gold Miner/Prospector and Treasure Hunter you can recognize just who is a B/S’er and who are real Treasure Hunters…Art

artie---

Since you appear to vouch for the above Mineoro device, which I assume is classified as an MFD rather than an LRL, and since it has no swivel (dowsing) mechanism, and must then be all-electronic, then would I be correct that you think this thing can pass Carl's double-blind test?

 

[Rudy(CA)]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

JP,

Loved the explanation about the mutual annihilation of oppositely charged ions.

But I fail to see how the schematic you provided would allow detection of pico, atto or femto second wide impulses.

I can see however how the modified Colpitts oscillator (Q4) like circuit could be stimulated to produce a sporadic signal due to
some extraneous interference.

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

They should have called it an "ion-love detector."

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

JP,

Loved the explanation about the mutual annihilation of oppositely charged ions.

But I fail to see how the schematic you provided would allow detection of pico, atto or femto second wide impulses.

I can see however how the modified Colppits oscillator (Q4) like circuit could be stimulated to produce a sporadic signal due to
some extraneous interference.

Hi Rudy,

The annihilation of oppositely charged ions... Hmmm....
From what I can gather, they are describing the mechanics of a spark in theatrical metaphors. But it does mean something. If you start with a big spark caused by shorting a battery, you will create a noticable plasma that you could detect on a static detector or a radio reciever because of the broadband noise. And in the plasma you would have a lot of ions, probably mostly air ions, but no doubt a few metal ions form the conductors that were shorted. As you reduced the voltage smaller and smaller, the spark would get smaller until there was no significant spark seen, and we would be approaching the molecular level where there was simply a charge transfer and the associated movement of electrons and other subatomic responses. And this sparking example would begin to look a lot like an ion neuralizing at that scale.

As near as I can tell, the Mineoro people feel they discovered something about these small scale transfers of charge, which they consider to be ionic transfers rather than purely electrostatic movement of electrons. It appears they are saying that when an ion neurtalizes, they can detect the atto/femto second pulse it makes with their sensitive electronics. I find it hard to believe conisdering the best transistor they have on board is a general purpose signal trasnsistor. We could consider maybe if a cluster of ions neutralized all at the same time, (perhaps a static discharge happening) then that femto second would grow to a nanosecond? Maybe that would be on the verge of becoming visible? I think they would need to upgrade the transistors first, then maybe. But I am guessing they consider the spark made by each metal to have a unique wave form, or energy level of some sort, similar to spectrographic data. So gold will make a different kind of spark than copper electrically. They said another thing that seems pertinent: "Through electrostatic, the ions walk long distances as if along an invisible wire". This makes me think they are talking about the electrical charge traveling, but not the ion. Much as a lightning bolt will allow a charge to travel without the exact atoms which originally had the charge physically moving. This is not what they publish exactly, but it seems to make more sense than the concept that ions are moving long distances through the air to pass through the walls of that plastic tube. (Not to imply that that plastic tube has any ability to respond to a distant or nearby ion). But if a distant spark was strong enough, it may make a sound on the big loop.

All of this seems a very far stretch to me. But then we are talking about possible theories, not probabilities. I would like to hear some fatal errors to this thought if anyone knows any.


Back to the detector... The problem is what does the circuit do?

From what I can see, it looks kind of like a broadband receiver at the big loop that is mixed in an odd way with whatever comes out of the "ion chamber". And what comes out of the ion chamber looks like nothing if I had to guess. If anything did come out, it appears to be the wrong impedance to do anything in the circuit above. This circuit looks like it was designed to do something, but it is hard for me to determine what. It seems unclear why they would mix two signals to one, then later split the resulting single signal and send it to two different inputs of the Atmel processor. I can only guess they needed two different signal voltages in order to perform different signal processing functions. From what I can see it looks like it will probably detect broadband noise. And this is exactly what most of the field reports I read say for this particular model. But I am still hoping to hear some explanation that makes this circuitry understandable.


Best wishes,
J_P

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

The ion "crash" sounds very similar to what makes the "click" sound in a radiation detector.

Just Google "ion chamber" for various descriptions of how they work.

 

[Rudy(CA)]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

JP,

Loved the explanation about the mutual annihilation of oppositely charged ions.

But I fail to see how the schematic you provided would allow detection of pico, atto or femto second wide impulses.

I can see however how the modified Colppits oscillator (Q4) like circuit could be stimulated to produce a sporadic signal due to
some extraneous interference.

Hi Rudy,

The annihilation of oppositely charged ions... Hmmm....
From what I can gather, they are describing the mechanics of a spark in theatrical metaphors. But it does mean something. If you start with a big spark caused by shorting a battery, you will create a noticable plasma that you could detect on a static detector or a radio reciever because of the broadband noise. And in the plasma you would have a lot of ions, probably mostly air ions, but no doubt a few metal ions form the conductors that were shorted. As you reduced the voltage smaller and smaller, the spark would get smaller until there was no significant spark seen, and we would be approaching the molecular level where there was simply a charge transfer and the associated movement of electrons and other subatomic responses. And this sparking example would begin to look a lot like an ion neuralizing at that scale.

As near as I can tell, the Mineoro people feel they discovered something about these small scale transfers of charge, which they consider to be ionic transfers rather than purely electrostatic movement of electrons. It appears they are saying that when an ion neurtalizes, they can detect the atto/femto second pulse it makes with their sensitive electronics. I find it hard to believe conisdering the best transistor they have on board is a general purpose signal trasnsistor. We could consider maybe if a cluster of ions neutralized all at the same time, (perhaps a static discharge happening) then that femto second would grow to a nanosecond? Maybe that would be on the verge of becoming visible? I think they would need to upgrade the transistors first, then maybe. But I am guessing they consider the spark made by each metal to have a unique wave form, or energy level of some sort, similar to spectrographic data. So gold will make a different kind of spark than copper electrically. They said another thing that seems pertinent: "Through electrostatic, the ions walk long distances as if along an invisible wire". This makes me think they are talking about the electrical charge traveling, but not the ion. Much as a lightning bolt will allow a charge to travel without the exact atoms which originally had the charge physically moving. This is not what they publish exactly, but it seems to make more sense than the concept that ions are moving long distances through the air to pass through the walls of that plastic tube. (Not to imply that that plastic tube has any ability to respond to a distant or nearby ion). But if a distant spark was strong enough, it may make a sound on the big loop.

All of this seems a very far stretch to me. But then we are talking about possible theories, not probabilities. I would like to hear some fatal errors to this thought if anyone knows any.


Back to the detector... The problem is what does the circuit do?

From what I can see, it looks kind of like a broadband receiver at the big loop that is mixed in an odd way with whatever comes out of the "ion chamber". And what comes out of the ion chamber looks like nothing if I had to guess. If anything did come out, it appears to be the wrong impedance to do anything in the circuit above. This circuit looks like it was designed to do something, but it is hard for me to determine what. It seems unclear why they would mix two signals to one, then later split the resulting single signal and send it to two different inputs of the Atmel processor. I can only guess they needed two different signal voltages in order to perform different signal processing functions. From what I can see it looks like it will probably detect broadband noise. And this is exactly what most of the field reports I read say for this particular model. But I am still hoping to hear some explanation that makes this circuitry understandable.


Best wishes,
J_P

Before getting to the circuit details JP, I feel we ought to further explore and firm up the "physics" behind these ions.

I think we can agree that the device could not directly detect a gold ion as the ions would not be floating in air and certainly not at a distance
that would qualify the device as an LRL. Therefore, if anything, what it would have to detect (with some kind of directionality) is some kind
of electromagnetic wave that is characteristic of the desired metal (e.g. gold).

_________________________________
An aside on your allusion to a carbon arc lamp:
Unless the machine is supposed to work only during a thunderstorm, where does the energy needed to create the plasma come from?
Carbon arc lamp like energies are not common events outside of such storms. Besides, the ions created by such an event would have
relatively short life times before becoming neutral again. So, if you wait for the thunderstorm to pass by, by the time you get there all
the ions would be gone.
_________________________________

Now, if we go micro scale, the shedding or replacing of an electron in a gold atom. The energy required or given up in the process is the Work function and for gold it is 5 eV or about 8X10^-19 Joules of energy.

Using the well known formula E= hc/λ and solving for λ we get λ=hc/E which gives us a photon wavelength of 0.248 µm. The frequency
is, of course, the reciprocal of the wavelength and it is around 4 MHz. This is nowhere in the pico/femto/atto range claimed. Of course, it is not necessarily a steady stream of photons since only one photon is emitted (or absorbed) for each atom's transition. A transition in one direction emits a photon while a transition in the other direction absorbs it.

It is however in the frequency range of the schematic presented.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Hi J_P mi buddy: you posted -->No signal is receivable in any medium if it is below the noise floor where we are trying to receive it, by definition
*************
K what is this floor level ?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Question, is it possible to modify the incoming frequency so that the our biological detecting mechanism will pick up the sum. or difference.?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On your NMR, how would that apply to a no. of gold rings of different alloys but plated with the same pure gold outside?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
incidentally just what is the composition of a gold atom? how does a larger piece differ from a smaller one, especially with your NMR?

side issue, but I overhauled, calibrated, and used AAA devices.


Jose

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

HI Rudy, you posted -->good afternoon: It was posted -->At any instant in time, a photon has only one frequency
*********************
Nature does not operate in a static fashion. so this has no true basis, but it 'is' used for a series of static calculations which we later interpolate as a dynamic factor, which is useful, but not necessarily correct.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That is a nonsensical statement DJ. I presume you have proof of your conjecture?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually I was going to ask you for your definition any static in nature?' Everything in Nature moves, vibrates etc from the Hydrogen atom on. Even the Universe does.

Don Jose

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Evening J_P: you posted --> It seems unclear why they would mix two signals to one, then later split the resulting single signal and send it to two different inputs of the Atmel processor.
******************
check on how the AAA works, called differential Analyzation.

Don Jose

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Before getting to the circuit details JP, I feel we ought to further explore and firm up the "physics" behind these ions.

I think we can agree that the device could not directly detect a gold ion as the ions would not be floating in air and certainly not at a distance
that would qualify the device as an LRL. Therefore, if anything, what it would have to detect (with some kind of directionality) is some kind
of electromagnetic wave that is characteristic of the desired metal (e.g. gold).

_________________________________
An aside on your allusion to a carbon arc lamp:
Unless the machine is supposed to work only during a thunderstorm, where does the energy needed to create the plasma come from?
Carbon arc lamp like energies are not common events outside of such storms. Besides, the ions created by such an event would have
relatively short life times before becoming neutral again. So, if you wait for the thunderstorm to pass by, by the time you get there all
the ions would be gone.
_________________________________

Now, if we go micro scale, the shedding or replacing of an electron in a gold atom. The energy required or given up in the process is the Work function and for gold it is 5 eV or about 8X10^-19 Joules of energy.

Using the well known formula E= hc/λ and solving for λ we get λ=hc/E which gives us a photon wavelength of 0.248 µm. The frequency
is, of course, the reciprocal of the wavelength and it is around 4 MHz. This is nowhere in the pico/femto/atto range claimed. Of course, it is not necessarily a steady stream of photons since only one photon is emitted (or absorbed) for each atom's transition. A transition in one direction emits a photon while a transition in the other direction absorbs it.

It is however in the frequency range of the schematic presented.

Hi Rudy,
Yes, I verified work function the for gold in the CRC handbook, which is listed at 5.1 to 5.47 electron volts depending on the lattice structure. And this does indeed result in a range of 4 MHz, which is in the frequency range of that circuit. So the speed of common signal transistors is no longer a problem when we consider a real wavelength that we can count on when a gold ion neutralizes.

But now I have another problem. This is claimed to be a classifying circuit which is calibrated to detect only gold. The problem is the frequency that results from a gold ion neutralizing is in the same exact range as for carbon, platinum, palladium, nickel, iridium, and cobalt. This means if it is resoponding to the frequency you derived from the energy used to neutralize a gold ion, it would find any one of those elements as well as gold. I wouldn't mind finding most of these things by accident, except for carbon. I have a suspicion that carbon ions are WAY more plentiful than gold ions, and they use an identical amount of energy to neutralize or ionize, resulting in an identical frequency. It could mean digging up hundreds of pounds of plant roots, burrowing rodents, bugs, decaying wood, coal, Hmmmm.... Ok so if I found a coal mine or oil well maybe that would work for me.

But that's not the only problem. The other problem is I don't see anything in the circuit that could identify a 4 mhz frequency related to this neutralizing of a gold ion. (or carbon ion, etc.) Unless we consider it is a static detector which has some working mechanism to identify the λ of gold ionizing (ion chamber?).
Let's take a look at what they claim about the ion chamber...
"We needed to produce the phenomenon of "micro crash" "nano crash" or below... It was invented not just as a classifier - "filter", but as a generator of positive "ions", receiver of negative ions, in order to [cause] a short-circuit to occur, and generator of electrostatic".
Ok, they are claiming ions are generated inside this cylinder which has a +5v 10 Hz pulse at the one end, and +27v steady DC at the pointed end, and a gold foil in the space about 5mm away from the point. It looks like the gold foil is positioned in voltage gradient at a point of +22.5 if we ignore the 5v pulsing at the other end.
is it possile for ions to form here?
Not in the manner that an ion generator works it cant. But what about working as an ion chamber?
This chamber looks suspiciously similar to some of the home made chambers on Charles Wentzel's page: http://www.techlib.com/science/ion.html#Even Simpler Version
I should point out there is a grounded metal foil wrapped around the Mineoro PVC pipe to complete the "tin can" geometry like we see in these photos.
A simpler version can be found here: http://dwarmstr.blogspot.com/2007/07/simple-ion-chamber-to-measure.html
On this page we see a tin can with a wire inside shows readable signals that will double from the 4.8mv null reading to 9.1mv when an alpha source is placed nearby. What is interesting is he gets this signal using a 36v supply with an air gap much larger than we see in the Mineoro chamber running at 27v. The gradient is obviously stronger in the Mineoro chamber, so we can expect it will perform ok as an ion chamber. It would seem there is some tiny quiescent state leakage signal which would become larger if something caused the air inside the chamber to become ionized.

So how is this ionization chamber related to distant gold ions neutralizing?
We read where Mineoro says "Through electrostatic, the "ions" walk long distances, as if along an invisible wire". It would be absurd to think that a gold ion in the distance could transport from it's location to inside the LRL and make an electronic signal in the circuit. So what kind of signal will come from the distant ion neutralizing? For a group of ions neutralizing, we are talking about an unbelievably small signal that cannot be detected even a millimeter away. But the Mineoro LRL is not a millimeter away, it is at long range distance. And the detecting equipment is an ion chamber which does not respond to ions neutralizing in the distance. An ion chamber responds to radiation creating ions inside the chamber, not to distant gold ions neutralizing. So how can the LRL detect a distant gold ion neutralizing?

The only answer remaining seems like a far stretch, but possibly there is some kind of radiation coming from the ground, or from the sky which passes through the area and sets off the ion chamber, and at the same time causes some ions where the treasure is to ionize. If this is happening, there is no transfer of signal from the treasure to the locator. But we do have an event where both the treasure and the ion chamber see an increase in ions at the same time. So in this scenario we could say the LRL is beeping when it is near a treasure. The problem is it will beep regardless which direction you point it, and it will beep even if the treasure is not there. so it will not be acting as a treasure locator, but as a radiation detector.

Then another corrolary scenario is when the radiation comes from the ground only near the treasure. (I got no idea why radiation would come from the source of the treasure, I am just supposing if it did). In this case the locator could act as a locator of the radiation if the geometry of sheilding influences on the ion chamber and the person holding the detector made the chamber more receptive to the radiation when pointed toward the treasure and radiation source.

A final problem with either of these radiation scenarios is how can this tiny ion chamber signal enter the circuit above it, considering the impedance of the transistor network it is trying to feed? The hobbyist said his chamber was barely able to to turn on his darlington pair so he could measure a signal.

To summarize, I have three questions:
1. If this machine is detecting the energy of a gold ion neutralizing, how can it determine the difference from other elements that show the same energy when their ions neutralize?
2. What in the circuitry can identify a gold ion neutralizing?
3. How can the ionization chamber send any kind of tiny signal to the circuit above when the impedance is not even close to a match? (Or am I wrong about this)?


Best wishes,
J_P

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Evening J_P: you posted --> It seems unclear why they would mix two signals to one, then later split the resulting single signal and send it to two different inputs of the Atmel processor.
******************
check on how the AAA works, called differential Analyzation.

Don Jose

Hi Mr. Don,
I can find no reference to "differential analyzation" from AAA using online searches. What is an AAA device? A radiation detector?
If I rule out you are talking about calculus, maybe you mean differential signal processing?
A differential amplifier usually begins with two different signals which may be similar, but have some difference that we wish to examine. In this Mineoro circuit, we do not send two different signals to send to the Atmel processor. They are the same. The only diffence is one travels through some extra resistors first. The same signal is different only in its strength, which is already known and was done intentionally. This leads me to suspect the reason they sent this same signal twice is because they needed to perform signal processing on it a second time to extract different information than they are looking for in the first instance. But I could be wrong about this. I'm just guessing.

Best wishes,
J_P

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Hi J_P mi buddy: you posted -->No signal is receivable in any medium if it is below the noise floor where we are trying to receive it, by definition
...
Jose

Hi Mr. Don,

The noise floor is a level of noise that is picked up by the sensor at the location where the signal is being received.
For eyesight, a signal below the noise floor would be a view of the road when someone is driving toward you with his high beam lights on. Maybe his lights are bright enough to make it impossible for you to read the words on a roadsign. Then the roadsign image is momentarily below the noise floor and cannot be resolved. Even though light from the roadsign still reached your eyes, the signal of an image pattern of the sign did not.

This noise floor requirement exists for any kind signal which might be at a location where we have equipment to receive it.
As an example, if we listen to a news broadcast from a radio playing on the other side of the room, we might hear it ok even though there is some other noise such as a clock ticking. The noise floor is low, so the news sounds come through to our ears loud and clear.
But if the kids come home with their friends and start practicing playing heavy metal with their guitars and drums, the level of noise might get very high so that we would not be able to hear the news, even though the sounds from it are still reaching our ears. The sound of the news broadcast is no longer above the noise floor. Of course, we could turn up the volume of the radio until it is loud enough to hear above the noise, and now we have it above the noise floor again. This means we needed the signal to be stronger in order to hear it above the noise floor when kids are playing heavy metal.

Other options are:
1. Move the radio and the receiver (our ears) away from the noise to another room
2. We could remove or reduce the noise -- remove the kids playing heavy metal or turn down thier sound level so we could hear the news above them.
3. Shield the noise - place enough acoustic barriers over all the sound sources such as drums and amplifiers in the room until we can hear the news.
4. Move the receiver (our ears) closer to the radio where the signal is stronger until we find a distance where it is above the noise floor.

In a treasure detecting scenario the option of moving the treasure away from the noise requires recovering the treasure first. So we can cross #1 off the list for long range locating. But we could use noise shielding or noise cancelling methods for some kinds of noise. It would depend on the kind of signal we are trying to cancel the noise from. If we are talking about electromagnetic interference, a good amount of it could be shielded or cancelled because we know the nature of some of the noise which is predictable. But the hard part is the non-predictable noise, especially as we start looking to find weaker signals. Then we start detecting all kinds of weak geo-signals, man made random noise, and noise from space when we are looking for a signal between the ELF and EHF frequencies. It seems it would be a happy situation if we were to find a new practical treasure hunting signal medium that was not electromagnetic in nature.

Another option from the sound analogy above, moving closer to the treasure requires we have a clue at which direction the treasure is first, which is the function of a long range locator. We can't move closer to the treasure except by random guessing and educated guessing until we receive some biological or machine-detected information about the location or direction of the hidden treasure. At this juncture, we would need to look at what kind of informaton (ie: signal) could give us this clue.

Another possibility from the sound analogy above is to turn up the volume on the signal. We can't simply walk up to the treasure and turn it up, but we may be able to do something to remotely turn it up, or maybe induce a new signal in the treasure that we could detect from a distance. This requires that whatever we do to turn up the signal strength or induce a new signal will reach the treasure with enough energy to accomplish this feat. Then, this stronger signal or new signal we induce in the treasure must return to our receiver strong enough for us to detect it above the noise floor. One example of doing this is a metal detector that induces a new signal in a treasure that we can detect. But it fails to do this at long range because the induced signal strength drops below the noise floor when we move to longer distances. So far nobody has come up with a practical method to induce a new signal to detect from a buried treasure farther than a few feet, or maybe up to 25 feet for large caches and ore bodies. Maybe it would be good to look for ways to remotely boost signals which already exist in a treasure to a level where we can detect them from a distance.

Best wishes,
J_P

p.s. At present, the best real working electronic LRLs have been used to repeatably pinpoint gold that is buried up to 5000 feet. This is done by detecting weak signals which are received from the buried gold, and are barely above the noise floor. Unfortunately, this apparatus is not useful for treasure hunting where we hunt for treasures less than a ton.

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

A final problem with either of these radiation scenarios is how can this tiny ion chamber signal enter the circuit above it, considering the impedance of the transistor network it is trying to feed?

Total disregard for impedance matching seems not merely common, but almost a requirement in LRLs, particularly relating to antenna coupling.

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Question, is it possible to modify the incoming frequency so that the our biological detecting mechanism will pick up the sum. or difference.?

Jose

Hi Mr. Don,

The sum and difference method you are talking about still requires there is a usable signal above the noise floor coming in before we extract a difference. The noise floor is defined to be the level of noise which prevents detection of the signal at the receiving equipment. A sum/difference signal method is usually implemented in order to shift the signal from a non-useful frequency to a usable one. It does not remove the noise, it only shifts the frequency after we receive it. Detecting the sum or difference of two signals is a method commonly used in radio reception and astronomy to extract a signal by electronically shifting it into a useful range. It is also an important decoding method to extract digital data or analog signals from a higher frequency signal that we receive.

Examples of applying the sum or difference method to biological detecting mechanisms sometimes involve hearing. When you hear two constant sound tones almost the same frequency, you can sometimes hear the difference between the frequencies as a third lower frequency tone. For example, a 460 Hz sound and a 400 Hz sound could cause you to hear a 60 Hz sound that is not being made. You could think you are hearing some line power noise, when it is really a sound that was generated from the difference between the two sounds you played at the same time. This principle also happens with seeing colors in vision. But I don't know that this it has much to do with improving the ability to detect things above noise which may be present. Somebody correct me if I am wrong about this.

An example of where shifting the frequency to a useful range for biological mechanisms is found in treasure hunting. A BFO metal detector uses sum/difference methods to make very slight changes in frequency easy to hear when we move the coil near a treasure. We wouldn't be able to notice the slight change in frequency if we were able to simply listen to the frequency of the coil directly as we scan for treasure. But the difference method shifts the coil frequency to a range that we can adjust to easily notice the variations. This results in much better resolution than using a direct method without extracting the difference. In an LRL scenario, we might be looking for something that is at a frequency beyound what we could detect directly with our senses. This may require we use a sum/difference method to shif the frequency to a range we can use. Maybe similar to how we could use sum/difference methods to hear ultrasonic sounds we can't hear directly.


Best wishes,
J_P

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

The very first step in building a (real) Long Range Metal Detector, would be to determine, by testing, if there is actually something there to detect.

There must be something different going on, in the immediate vicinity of the desired target, from what is happening in the entire search area.

If there is no difference, then there is nothing to detect, in the first place.

So that would be the first step.

However, as J_P pointed out, even if there is nothing discernable occurring at the target, under normal conditions, it may be possible to stimulate some kind of response from the target, which will present something that is different enough from the environment to then be detectable.

 

[Rudy(CA)]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Before getting to the circuit details JP, I feel we ought to further explore and firm up the "physics" behind these ions.

I think we can agree that the device could not directly detect a gold ion as the ions would not be floating in air and certainly not at a distance
that would qualify the device as an LRL. Therefore, if anything, what it would have to detect (with some kind of directionality) is some kind
of electromagnetic wave that is characteristic of the desired metal (e.g. gold).

_________________________________
An aside on your allusion to a carbon arc lamp:
Unless the machine is supposed to work only during a thunderstorm, where does the energy needed to create the plasma come from?
Carbon arc lamp like energies are not common events outside of such storms. Besides, the ions created by such an event would have
relatively short life times before becoming neutral again. So, if you wait for the thunderstorm to pass by, by the time you get there all
the ions would be gone.
_________________________________

Now, if we go micro scale, the shedding or replacing of an electron in a gold atom. The energy required or given up in the process is the Work function and for gold it is 5 eV or about 8X10^-19 Joules of energy.

Using the well known formula E= hc/λ and solving for λ we get λ=hc/E which gives us a photon wavelength of 0.248 µm. The frequency
is, of course, the reciprocal of the wavelength and it is around 4 MHz. This is nowhere in the pico/femto/atto range claimed. Of course, it is not necessarily a steady stream of photons since only one photon is emitted (or absorbed) for each atom's transition. A transition in one direction emits a photon while a transition in the other direction absorbs it.

It is however in the frequency range of the schematic presented.

Hi Rudy,
Yes, I verified work function the for gold in the CRC handbook, which is listed at 5.1 to 5.47 electron volts depending on the lattice structure. And this does indeed result in a range of 4 MHz, which is in the frequency range of that circuit. So the speed of common signal transistors is no longer a problem when we consider a real wavelength that we can count on when a gold ion neutralizes.

But now I have another problem. This is claimed to be a classifying circuit which is calibrated to detect only gold. The problem is the frequency that results from a gold ion neutralizing is in the same exact range as for carbon, platinum, palladium, nickel, iridium, and cobalt. This means if it is resoponding to the frequency you derived from the energy used to neutralize a gold ion, it would find any one of those elements as well as gold. I wouldn't mind finding most of these things by accident, except for carbon. I have a suspicion that carbon ions are WAY more plentiful than gold ions, and they use an identical amount of energy to neutralize or ionize, resulting in an identical frequency. It could mean digging up hundreds of pounds of plant roots, burrowing rodents, bugs, decaying wood, coal, Hmmmm.... Ok so if I found a coal mine or oil well maybe that would work for me.

But that's not the only problem. The other problem is I don't see anything in the circuit that could identify a 4 mhz frequency related to this neutralizing of a gold ion. (or carbon ion, etc.) Unless we consider it is a static detector which has some working mechanism to identify the λ of gold ionizing (ion chamber?).
Let's take a look at what they claim about the ion chamber...
"We needed to produce the phenomenon of "micro crash" "nano crash" or below... It was invented not just as a classifier - "filter", but as a generator of positive "ions", receiver of negative ions, in order to [cause] a short-circuit to occur, and generator of electrostatic".
Ok, they are claiming ions are generated inside this cylinder which has a +5v 10 Hz pulse at the one end, and +27v steady DC at the pointed end, and a gold foil in the space about 5mm away from the point. It looks like the gold foil is positioned in voltage gradient at a point of +22.5 if we ignore the 5v pulsing at the other end.
is it possile for ions to form here?
Not in the manner that an ion generator works it cant. But what about working as an ion chamber?
This chamber looks suspiciously similar to some of the home made chambers on Charles Wentzel's page: http://www.techlib.com/science/ion.html#Even Simpler Version
I should point out there is a grounded metal foil wrapped around the Mineoro PVC pipe to complete the "tin can" geometry like we see in these photos.
A simpler version can be found here: http://dwarmstr.blogspot.com/2007/07/simple-ion-chamber-to-measure.html
On this page we see a tin can with a wire inside shows readable signals that will double from the 4.8mv null reading to 9.1mv when an alpha source is placed nearby. What is interesting is he gets this signal using a 36v supply with an air gap much larger than we see in the Mineoro chamber running at 27v. The gradient is obviously stronger in the Mineoro chamber, so we can expect it will perform ok as an ion chamber. It would seem there is some tiny quiescent state leakage signal which would become larger if something caused the air inside the chamber to become ionized.

So how is this ionization chamber related to distant gold ions neutralizing?
We read where Mineoro says "Through electrostatic, the "ions" walk long distances, as if along an invisible wire". It would be absurd to think that a gold ion in the distance could transport from it's location to inside the LRL and make an electronic signal in the circuit. So what kind of signal will come from the distant ion neutralizing? For a group of ions neutralizing, we are talking about an unbelievably small signal that cannot be detected even a millimeter away. But the Mineoro LRL is not a millimeter away, it is at long range distance. And the detecting equipment is an ion chamber which does not respond to ions neutralizing in the distance. An ion chamber responds to radiation creating ions inside the chamber, not to distant gold ions neutralizing. So how can the LRL detect a distant gold ion neutralizing?

The only answer remaining seems like a far stretch, but possibly there is some kind of radiation coming from the ground, or from the sky which passes through the area and sets off the ion chamber, and at the same time causes some ions where the treasure is to ionize. If this is happening, there is no transfer of signal from the treasure to the locator. But we do have an event where both the treasure and the ion chamber see an increase in ions at the same time. So in this scenario we could say the LRL is beeping when it is near a treasure. The problem is it will beep regardless which direction you point it, and it will beep even if the treasure is not there. so it will not be acting as a treasure locator, but as a radiation detector.

Then another corrolary scenario is when the radiation comes from the ground only near the treasure. (I got no idea why radiation would come from the source of the treasure, I am just supposing if it did). In this case the locator could act as a locator of the radiation if the geometry of sheilding influences on the ion chamber and the person holding the detector made the chamber more receptive to the radiation when pointed toward the treasure and radiation source.

A final problem with either of these radiation scenarios is how can this tiny ion chamber signal enter the circuit above it, considering the impedance of the transistor network it is trying to feed? The hobbyist said his chamber was barely able to to turn on his darlington pair so he could measure a signal.

To summarize, I have three questions:
1. If this machine is detecting the energy of a gold ion neutralizing, how can it determine the difference from other elements that show the same energy when their ions neutralize?
2. What in the circuitry can identify a gold ion neutralizing?
3. How can the ionization chamber send any kind of tiny signal to the circuit above when the impedance is not even close to a match? (Or am I wrong about this)?


Best wishes,
J_P

JP,

One 4 MHz photon is indistinguishable from another. There is no way to tell what gave rise to the existence of that photon other than tracing it back to its origin. Clearly, the equipment in question is not able to do that.

At best, the equipment can be tuned to 4 MHz and make an occasional beeping sound, but you can't attribute the beep as being the result of
a distant gold ion having captured an electron to become electrically neutral.

Impedance matching has no bearing on the attainable results I'm afraid.