Some consideration

[Nicolas]

Geo, I explained and demonstrate such strange phenomenon here:

http://www.longrangelocators.com/forums/showpost.php?p=131087&postcount=105

Sure, I wish to applaud to some working LRL too, but for now, I can't.

Hi Geo then what said about PD built by Andreas and your PD .????!

Seeying your video your PD detect the compass and but from Andreas not?

What the difference then between ????

The difference is one PD work and detect metal and other not work but detect the compass only

Strange is look then the skeptical not believe. But I m sure exist many LRL and PD work perfectly

[taxma1981]

Apparently the phenomenon can catch some by hand.this is mein detector

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5xceRuW4aw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN9q4qULzoA

[J_Player]

Hi J_Player,

Maybe there was a misunderstanding between us, in fact I call this phenomenon that allows the remote detection of buried metal and not the explanation of Alonzo who gave a pseudo-scientific explanation for what is probably not even he understood. I really appreciate your work to try to understand the scientific basis of the phenomenon that would be useful to increase the performance of Lrls.

Best Regards

Hi Franco,
This changes everything.
Now we have two "Phenomenon"s. A real one and a fake one, and we must decide which "Phenomenon" to use.
It appears that you want me to ignore the fake Mineoro "Phenomenon" and only consider the real "Phenomenon", which you describe as "...that allows the remote detection of buried metal"?
And as a newly initiated "Phenomenon" believer, you would prefer that when I continue this topic, I don't include any more science which might tend to contradict the concept of the "Phenomenon".
Is this correct?

Best Wishes,
J_P

[FrancoItaly]

Hi J_Player,
No, of course, the phenomenon that allows the detection distance of buried objects is only one even if with many different faces. Every scientific contribution is welcome if it helps to improve the knowledge and lrls but I think the theory alone is not enough. I always appreciate your efforts to try to explain the phenomenon, efforts have certainly required a long time.
Best Regards

[J_Player]

Hi Franco,
This changes everything.
Now we have two "Phenomenon"s. A real one and a fake one, and we must decide which "Phenomenon" to use.
It appears that you want me to ignore the fake Mineoro "Phenomenon" and only consider the real "Phenomenon", which you describe as "...that allows the remote detection of buried metal"?
And as a newly initiated "Phenomenon" believer, you would prefer that when I continue this topic, I don't include any more science which might tend to contradict the concept of the "Phenomenon".
Is this correct?

Best Wishes,
J_P

Hi J_Player,
No, of course, the phenomenon that allows the detection distance of buried objects is only one even if with many different faces. Every scientific contribution is welcome if it helps to improve the knowledge and lrls but I think the theory alone is not enough. I always appreciate your efforts to try to explain the phenomenon, efforts have certainly required a long time.
Best Regards

Hi Franco,
This is excellent news.
At this point we are able to use both science, and the true version of the "Phenomenon" to improve the knowledge and LRLs, even if science contradicts the concept of the true version of the "Phenomenon".
(Note to self: I must be careful with this, lest my newly pledged allegiance to the "Phenomenon" may start to falter).

So my next question is this:
If theory alone is not enough, then what else is required?

Best wishes,
J_P

[FrancoItaly]

Hi Hi J_Player,

It's very simple, You need to leave the theory for some time and go outdoors with a LRL, maybe my LRL and realize the operation, The theory can not replace the practice ...

Best Regards

[J_Player]

Hi Hi J_Player,

It's very simple, You need to leave the theory for some time and go outdoors with a LRL, maybe my LRL and realize the operation, The theory can not replace the practice ...

Best Regards

Hi Franco,
This is great news. I can easily go outdoors with your LRL and practice the operation.
I may even be able to take measurements at TR1 with a very high impedance oscilloscope probe and show them in the forum so we will know what actual signals are coming in from the antenna and LC section.
Can you send your LRL so I can make these tests?

Best wishes,
J_P

[FrancoItaly]

Hi J_Player,
It would be possible but you have metal buried for some time to do the test? However, many have realized my LRL and no doubt you can build one...
Best Regards

[J_Player]

Hi J_Player,
It would be possible but you have metal buried for some time to do the test? However, many have realized my LRL and no doubt you can build one...
Best Regards

Hi Franco,
Yes I have many buried metals to detect.
This is California, where there are thousands of gold nuggets which have not yet been recovered from the ground. There are also many trash dumps buried in the location of old abandoned towns that threw brass and copper items along with their other trash into pits below the ground, and covered them with dirt. And I also have my own test field with buried copper and silver objects for about about 5 years.

However, I cannot build your LRL, because there is more to making a working LRL than simply putting components on a circuit board and adjusting the voltages.
A master LRL builder explained why an average LRL experimenter cannot build a reliable clone of someone else's work.
His post also explains the failure of others to make a working clone of your locator:

Best wishes,
J_P

[FrancoItaly]

Hi J_Player,

I'm Franco, not Andreas, my lrl it has nothing to do with Andreas. I do not sell anything and I do not expect to convince anyone but I think I have done a lot to this forum.

Best Regards

[J_Player]

Hi J_Player,

I'm Franco, not Andreas, my lrl it has nothing to do with Andreas. I do not sell anything and I do not expect to convince anyone but I think I have done a lot to this forum.

Best Regards

Hi Franco,
Of course you are not Andreas, and you have nothing to sell or to convince anyone of. I also am not Andreas, and I also have nothing to sell or to convince anyone of.

It is also true that your LRL has nothing to do with Andreas.
But the statements he made are still correct for people who attempt to build a clone of your LRL.
We see evidence that he is correct from the people who attempted to duplicate your circuit.
The problems of trying to build a duplicate circuit of this type are exactly as Andreas describes: The difference in PC boards, the exact placement of wires, and other small critical tips.
He gives that advice after 25 years of experience.
But I already knew that from my experience building small-signal circuits.

The point is, it is highly unlikely that an average forum reader could duplicate the detection you get from trying to build a clone of your circuit.

Best Wishes,
J_P

[FrancoItaly]

Hi J-Player,
I have over 45 years of experience and I design and make all my own pcb, certainly those who have never worked in this field and mount only kit may have some difficulty. I draw with my pen pcb directly and I do not have a specific plan to be presented in the forum. However, on this thread someone has already put a good design and some of you might do the same ...
Regards

[J_Player]

Hi J-Player,
I have over 45 years of experience and I design and make all my own pcb, certainly those who have never worked in this field and mount only kit may have some difficulty. I draw with my pen pcb directly and I do not have a specific plan to be presented in the forum. However, on this thread someone has already put a good design and some of you might do the same ...
Regards

Hi Franco,
I agree, some of the readers in this forum might do the same. They can build clones of your circuit by using the same part numbers and making their own circuit boards. They can finish their project that may look similar to yours and may even produce some kind of results. But the results will not be the same, because their circuits cannot be tuned the same as yours due to different component value variations, different parasitic coupling and different small signal leakage in their circuit boards. And there is no way they can make adjustments to find the same signals in their circuit as you do because nobody knows what signals you have other than a few test point voltages. When we look at the reported results from people who attempted to duplicate your circuit, we see they have different voltages at the test points than what you recommended.

The great thing about your project is anyone can built it using a few parts, and they can quickly go into the field and experiment with it. It is even easier to build than the Totem, which has no guarantee of locating anything. The problem is your project is not fully documented to show what signals should exist in the various stages, or what microvolt threshold levels should be seen to cause the oscillator to change, and no clues about what kind of phase angle changes and amplitude changes before the oscillator stops. And most importantly, no clues about what kind of signal the antenna is passing to the TR1/TR2 stage.

The reason why I am not interested to build this project is because I do not want to spend the next 8 years trying to figure out what the "Phenomenon" is, and trying to improve an oscillator circuit to find it.
If you say "Phenomenon" exists, then that's good enough for me. I have no need to prove it with an oscillator. There are skeptics who try to tell me other ideas why your oscillator shows signals, but I don't take them seriously, because their science might tend to destroy my newly pledged allegiance to the "Phenomemon". Besides, they are known skeptic scientific pretenders who talk about science nonsense, and they never show us circuits to find the "Phenomenon".

Best Wishes,
J_P

[FrancoItaly]

Hi J_Player,
I do not wanna waste my time with this diatribe that is not helpful for anyone.
Best Regards

[Geo]

Hi Geo then what said about PD built by Andreas and your PD .????!

Seeying your video your PD detect the compass and but from Andreas not?

What the difference then between ????

The difference is one PD work and detect metal and other not work but detect the compass only

Strange is look then the skeptical not believe. But I m sure exist many LRL and PD work perfectly

Hi Nicolas.
You misunderstand something.....
The video that you saw from WM6 is not mine. Maybe it is from WM6.