~SWR~
Fortunately, most people with an iota of sense about electricity, knows that you need two poles to complete the circuit. In other words... just touching something with one hand, will not generate an electrical discharge. One would have to have the device/implement held between both hands.
You forgot about the feet being a natural ground.
Ergo, anybody who claims they can hold an item with only one hand, and the electrical impulses generated by the human body travel though/into that that item is doing so with either the intent to commit fraud, or simply electronically illiterate.
No fraud at all.,.just facts that everyone understands
Thanks, and a tip of the hat to JP for proving that a common calculator will not produce various frequencies that can be used for "treasure hunting", as the pro-fraudsters solicit
RangerTell Calculator - A Comprehensive Report
No need to go to that web site. It is all here on this thread where SWR can not delete our answers
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,393152.msg2895358.html#msg2895358
ter a member of the Geotech forum identified the calculator as looking the same as his Casio
I opened the backs of both calculators where the batteries are changed, and I could see they are not the same. The circuit boards are different,
The Casio has a single battery for a 1.5v supply, while the Examiner calculator uses two cells to run at 3v.
The casio also had more conductors leading to the display to drive 15 digits, while the other has only 12 digits.
. I could see both calculators had a large drop of black epoxy covering the processor area just below the display.
. I could see both calculators had a large drop of black epoxy covering the processor area just below the display.
With the Rangertell calculator, I could trigger a signal using either coil as long as the coil was within 3cm distance from the calculator. I should point out the high frequency ripple you see along the eponential curves was almost nonexistent in the 3-turn coil. This HF ripple was not
Tests were made on the Examiner calculator outdoors to see what signals it sends out to the Examiner circuitry. These tests showed the calculator generates pulse signals that can be detected at millivolt levels up to several cm distance from the back of the calculator.
In order to obtain the same signal the Examiner receives, we wound a coil identical to the Examiner spiral coil and positioned it below the calculator at the same location where the Examiner coil is located.
The results of the calculator testing showed the Examiner calculator sends detectable signals into the air behind it that can be measured up to 5mv on an oscilloscope when using an identical pickup coil as is used inside the Examiner.
So SWR…J.player has proved that the Examiner Calculator produces a signal…That is what my experiments have proven by using a set of rods..So could you tell us what happens inside the Ranger Tell unit when you add @100 mv from the human hand to the rest of the circuits?..Art
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,393152.msg2895859.html#msg2895859
Full text of
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,393139.0.html
This comprehensive report shows exactly what is behind the “main drive” of the RangerTell Examiner. Under the hood, if you will…..of a calculator. This report is being posted on TreasureNet at the request of LRL Proponents to prove that a common calculator will not transmit various frequencies by keystrokes. The merits of this report can be debated in another thread, as the creator is not present to defend this copyright protected material.
This copyright protected report is being used with the permission of its creator. More information can be found here
Without any further ado….Under the hood of the RangerTell calculator
The Rangertell Examiner Project - Report 4
Dec 14, 2009 - Calculator testing indoors
The calculator that came with the Examiner has no brand name or other marks to identify it other than "scientific calculator" printed on the front. After a member of the Geotech forum identified the calculator as looking the same as his Casio, I got to wondering if my Casio calculator was the same too. My Casio fx-300ES calculator has nearly the same buttons as the Examiner calculator, but mine has a solar power panel, while the Examiner calculator does not. I opened the backs of both calculators where the batteries are changed, and I could see they are not the same. The circuit boards are different, and the Casio has a few more components, probably associated with the power panel. The Casio has a single battery for a 1.5v supply, while the Examiner calculator uses two cells to run at 3v. The casio also had more conductors leading to the display to drive 15 digits, while the other has only 12 digits. I could see both calculators had a large drop of black epoxy covering the processor area just below the display.
The drop of epoxy is what gave me my next idea. If there is any signal coming from the calculator, then it would originate in the processor area under the epoxy. And if this signal is inductively coupled to the Examiner, I should be able to pick it up by using a coil. So I put both calculators back together and made up a 5cm diameter coil 50 turns from #18 wire and connected one end to ground, and the other end to the oscilloscope probe. First I looked at what wave form I could see in the air. I found the AC power noise at 60Hz that is usually in the lab, and I found some high frequency noise from the computers. This HF noise measured 5mv across this coil, but could be made higher if you rest your hand on top the coil. Then I put the Rangertell calculator on top the coil and saw a periodic AC spike that looked like an exponential curve about every 15us. This is the same kind of wave form I see when there is ringing after a digital signal switches. I could see a periodic fluctuation in the voltage about twice a second, similar to a heartbeat. This was later seen as a momentary voltage decrease every time the calculator curser blinked on.
I held the same coil against the Casio calculator and found it was not producing much of a signal to pick up inductively. I found the wave form was a little different on the Casio, as well as a lot weaker. There was a large spike, followed by a train of many very weak spikes that were hardly discernible, and they were at only 1/4 the frequency of the Rangertell calculator. I imagine these differences are to keep the power consumption low for the solar power and the single battery. When I slowed down the time base I could see the large periodic pulse followed by very many smaller pulses.
I made another 5cm diameter pickup coil with 3 turns and got a good signal from the Rangertell calculator with very little HF background noise from the lab. But I could not get a strong enough signal from the Casio to sync on. I think the lower voltage of the Casio produces pulses that are weaker than the threshold of noise in the lab. With the Rangertell calculator, I could trigger a signal using either coil as long as the coil was within 3cm distance from the calculator. I should point out the high frequency ripple you see along the eponential curves was almost nonexistent in the 3-turn coil. This HF ripple was not from the calculator, but noise from the lab, as you can see in the photos taken with no power on the calculator. The large sine wave is a magnified view of the HF noise taken when the calculator first triggered a pulse. These are not definitive tests. They are only what I saw when I hooked up a quick coil for a peek at what signals I could measure from behind the calculator.
Jan 09, 2010 - Calculator testing outdoors
Tests were made on the Examiner calculator outdoors to see what signals it sends out to the Examiner circuitry. These tests showed the calculator generates pulse signals that can be detected at millivolt levels up to several cm distance from the back of the calculator. Pulses from the calculator were observed at 575 Hz contained in an envelope of stronger pulses at 30 Hz. Oscilloscope images showed changes in the wave shape during the time while a calculator key was held in the pressed down position, and a fluctuation in voltage that could be identified as a slower switching rise time when the cursor was blinking on. It is presumed the pulses observed were caused by RFI noise created during the rising and falling edges of the calculator's internal frequency dividers that are timed by a an electronic clock or timer.
Outdoor test details:
Over a several day period we made electronic tests of the calculator on the Examiner to see what signals we can detect in the air around it using a Tektronix 433 oscilloscope with a range to 35 MHz. In order to obtain the same signal the Examiner receives, we wound a coil identical to the Examiner spiral coil and positioned it below the calculator at the same location where the Examiner coil is located. The Oscilloscope probe was connected to the test coil to collect whatever signal can be detected at the back side of the calculator. We aslo ran tests without using the coil to see if any signal can be picked up in the air using only the oscilloscope probe.
The calculator tests were made outdoors in order to move the calculator away from RFI noise from test equipment, computers and AC power wiring. The oscilloscope was connected to an extension cord and placed several feet away from the side of the building. The ambient noise in the air was reduced at this location, and made the small calculator signals easier to trigger and to discern than when it was tested indoors. There still remained some residual noise in the outdoor location, which was noted when making photos of the calculator signals.
The results of the calculator testing showed the Examiner calculator sends detectable signals into the air behind it that can be measured up to 5mv on an oscilloscope when using an identical pickup coil as is used inside the Examiner. This signal is strongest when the coil is held against the calculator enclosure, and diminishes as the coil is moved away from the calculator until it is not detectable at about 4-5 cm distance.
We also observed other locations on the calculator that generate stronger signals than the signal seen where the Examiner coil is located. These signals varied in shape and strength, depending on where the coil is held against the calculator. The strongest signals were detected at the display and the large navigation button just below the display on the front side of the calculator (this is the area where the processor is located under the black epoxy drop). Signals from the back side of the calculator also showed the strongest signals at the same locations at the front, but they were about 3/4 the strength of the signals seen on the front side. The Examiner coil is centered 4cm below the strongest signals on the back of the calculator at a location where the power supply wires are soldered to the keypad conductors. The signal at this location was seen to be about half the strength of the stronger signals found near the processor and display, and it was inverted, showing opposite polarity spikes as the signal seen at the display area.
Oscilloscope images
Most of the tests were done with the oscilloscope set to the 2mV scale at various time sweeps. The screen showed pulse trains coming from the calculator that could be detected using the coil, or by using a plain alligator clip held against the calculator to show the same signals with only slight differences seen on the screen. The fastest calculator pulses we measured were 575Hz periodic spikes, contained within a 30Hz envelope that began with a large spike. The signals emanating from the calculator were determined by first looking at the ambient noise signal with the calculator removed, then moving the coil from the open air to the back of the calculator to see what new signals the calculator added to the ambient noise. The first signs of a signal were seen at 4-5cm distance from the back surface of the calculator enclosure. This was also done with the calculator turned off to check whether the calculator added any noise when it was not running (it did not add noise when it was turned off).
The images above showing the smaller time frames are actually taken from the plain alligator clip as a sensor, which showed a similar timing image as when using the coil. After taking readings for several hours, it became apparent that different components of the wave shape of these pulses could be accentuated by moving the probe or coil to different locations on the calculator surface, and by adjusting the oscilloscope probe and ground for different connection methods, as well as different triggering adjustments. But regardless of the method of measuring, the signals seen at the back of the calculator location where the Examiner spiral coil sees it remained the same except for a momentary change in the signal while a calculator button is held down, and a change in the rising edge of the first pulse caught by the trigger when the calculator curser blinked on. The signal returned to an identical signal when the button is released and the cursor blinked off.
Measuring the signals inside the calculator
After some hours of looking at the signals that can be picked up outside the calculator, I decided to measure the actual signals inside to see what is really there. This was done by connecting the probe ground to the negative terminal of the calculator battery and checking the signal at various conductors on the circuit board. I paid special attention to the conductors in the area where the Examiner coil is positioned.
© 2009 - J_P All rights reserved. Contact
j_player59@hotmail.com for permission.
