Ivconic's Negative Ion Detector circuit

[Carl-NC]

I have been out-of-town, trying to catch up on everything... this is a very interesting thread, and exactly what this forum is intended for. Thanks for all the contributions.

Just a note... when you upload an attachment (image), please keep the size reasonable... 600-800 pixels wide is ideal.

- Carl

[Anker]

The Regard!

For checking the functioning the scheme of the detector possible to do the artificial generator "golden" negative (or positive) ion. This will imitate long ago hidden gold in ground. It is Enough to do the needle (the edge) from gild and tax on it for the land high power. The Device to execute in the manner of sticks, which possible install in the ground and provide the contact with the ground, on the other end of the stick - a generator ion. Now possible try to take the receiver on a certain distance flow blown off wind "golden" ion.

[J_Player]

In response to Esteban's and Ivconic's posts, I also would like to see a test that shows whether this machine can locate buried treasure. Since

Estaban has a test area with long buried targets samples, we already have a good test bed among the readers in this forum. And we have the circuit and expertise to build the ion detector machine.
I propose that an inexpensive ion detector is built using Ivconic's circuit and then tested to locate targets that have been buried a long time. This circuit can be built on 2 or 3 hobby perf-boards for a very low cost, and the antenna and dish can be salvaged for no cost. When this machine is completed and tested for finding ions, then I propose we use Esteban's test area to see how well the ion detector works. Then we can test the machine to see if it tells us where to find the targets.

This is how I propose that we can do this: First, Ivconic should build the detectror circuit and tune it and test it to insure that it works for collecting ions. Then send only the circuit boards to me along with trim pots connected (this is to make inexpensive shipping cost). I will install new batteries and build a new enclosure and dish and antenna. I will make preliminary tests to adjust the detector so it detects ions from known ion sources. Once it works, then I will go to Esteban's sample field along with any other forum members who want to watch, and we can see how well this machine works at locating the buried samples. This will also be a good opportunity to test the iron "ground battery" effects that Franco talks about.

I propose this test only if Ivconic and Esteban are willing to proceed. If Ivconic and Esteban are interested in testing this negative ion machine on Esteban's long-buried target sample field, then please contact me and make arrangements. J_Player59 at hotmail.

PS. I will also bring hot dogs for zinc grill, but would be better carne asada burritos.

My more detailed comments about the posts are below.

[J_Player]

Thank you Esteban, Anker, Franco and Ivconic for your information about using the negative ion detector.

Esteban has provided a very detailed method to use the ion detector. His method is to walk with the machine in hand, swinging the machine right and left as you walk. The machine should be held at a 90 degree angle away from the body while swinging it right to left and looking for variations in the signal. This method sounds similar to the method of using a conventional coil metal detector, except the ion detector is held at arm's height above the ground while walking perhaps a little faster than a person with a coil type detector would walk. When the target is located by a rapid rise in the signal, then it is pinpointed by walking in the other direction, similar to a method of pinpointing a target with a coil type deteector. Esteban cautions us to use the ion detector inland in locations away from high voltage power lines and other interference.

According to Esteban's explanation, the ion detector can be expected to locate ions or electrostatic field gradients in the vicinity of the buried target, but only if the target had been buried for a number of years. He says the buried metal target will develop an electric field around it or a field like the field surrounding a pole of a battery. This field is responsible for the signal seen on the negative ion detector according to Esteban.

According to Franco's theory, a ground battery can be made by putting 2 dissimilar metal objects in the ground 2 meters apart. And this ground battery can be detected with the ion detector because of the electric field of the ground battery. He apparently is talking about metal objects that have been recently placed in the ground.

Anker has posted the theory of operation of the Mineoro LRLs as told by a Damásio & Alonso from the Mineoro company. Portions of the Mineoro letter agree with statements that Esteban and Franco made about ions and electric fields. Much of this letter is simply theories advanced by Damásio & Alonso from Mineoro to explain their understanding of how the Minero devices work.

Ivconic returned and made comments to indicate he a skeptic who does not know if this machine can find treasure. He considers it only an electronic device that measures changes in the ion density in the air, and more testing is needed to see if it can locate long buried gold. After noting a mumber of apparent errors in Damásio & Alonso's theories, he goes on to say that he would like to see improvements in the signal processing portion of the ion detector.

My commentary is as follows:

1. Now we have a method of using the Ion detector, and an explanation of how it can be used to locate buried treasures from Esteban.

2. Ivconic asks about mods in the signal processing after the differential amp. I suppose any kind of signal processing can be done if we first know what we want to find out about the signal. If you want to find audio signals, then you can add a circuit with an adjustable bandpass filter that feeds to a small audio amp or rectifier to a meter. I would think that until we know what we are looking for the best information about the signal can be seen on an oscillosope. By testing the ion detector with different targets and looking at the signal with an oscilloscope, we can learn what are the important features of the signal to look for when locating treasures. After the testing is done, then we can easily build circuits that measure the treasure information in the signal.

Concerning the field and battery effect of buried objects, and how the ion detector senses the location of the object:

3. Battery effect not so strong as a commercial battery: We all know that if we put dissimilar metals in an electrolyte, we can expect a current to flow in a wire connected between the metals. We know there are ions being created and destroyed at the poles of the battery. These ions are generally confined to the electrolyte and they do not migrate to the atmosmphere in any significant amount for most batteries. Most of the ionic action takes place while a battery is being discharged or charged. A lesser amount of ionic activity occurs in a battery that is not connected to an active circuit. In order for a "ground battery" to work, it seems there must be moisture in the ground where the poles of the battery are. There must also be an electrolyte dissolved in the moisture. In the case of buried gold, which is considered inert, and any ions formed will be very small amount of gold atoms combining with the electrolyte (probably a salt of chlorine or a sulfate in the presence of moisture will form the electrolyte). If a few of the gold atoms combine with the electrolyte, then still the gold will become a cathode, as it is the least reactive of the metals to be found in the ground. The anode will be nearly any other element in the near vicinity of the buried gold which has contact with the same mousture and electrolyte. Nearly all common metals are more reactive than gold, and will become the anode if in close proximity to the gold. The most likely metal would be iron (black sands, magnetite, etc. In the regions where natural gold nuggets are found, we often find silver, copper, lead and traces of other metals. Any of these metals present could also become an anode. The anode would be decomposing as it reacted with the electrolyte, while the gold would remain relatively intact. If this "ground battery" were to be 100% efficient (as good as a gold/iron battery made in a laboratory with a suitable electrolyte), then the battery would develop less than 2 volts. The "ground battery" is not in these ideal conditions, and can be expected to develop a lower voltage and fewer ions. In many cases The ground battery has only damp soil or sands to form the electrolyte from elements in contact with the moisture.

4. Ionic activity from the "ground battery": There may be a mechanism by which airborne ions are sensed in a higher concentration above the buried target. I doubt that the mechanism is from Ions leaving the soil and migrating upwards through the air to the ion detector dish. If for some unexplained reason ions were leaving the buried target soil at a high rate, then it is not likely these ions would hover above the target without blowing away in the wind. I don't know what the actual mechanism is, but I doubt the detector is sensing ions that moved from the electrolyte of the "ground battery" to the air above, where the detector is located at arm'sheight. A simple experiment could be made to test this theory: Place a large plastic bag over the ground were the target is buried. place a similar bag over the ground where no target is buried. After waiting a few hours for the ions to accumulate in the bag, close the bottom of both bags and move them to where the ion detector is. You should now be able to sense a very high concentration of airborne ions from the bag that was over the target, but not from the other bag. My opinion is that if the ion detector finds more ion signal in the air above the area where the gold is buried, then these ions being detected did not originate in the ground electrolyte from the battery. There may be some connection to the underground gold, but it is hard for me to believe that ion migration into the air is the answer.

5. Electric field from ground battery: An electric field will exist in a battery which shows a voltage across the poles. This electric field is no stronger than the voltage over the distance that separates the poles. That is to say it is a very weak electric field, less than 2 volts over the distance between the gold and other metal in the damp soil. There also may be some mechanism that causes increased electric field measured at arm's height in the air above the buried target. I doubt this mechanism is the electric field produced from the ground battery effect. The 9v batteries that power the ion detector have a stronger electric field than the ground battery can create from it's electrolytic voltage generation (if it does in fact create a voltage). Consider: In dry air, it takes about 4000 volts to create a strong enough electric field that the air will ionize enough to throw a spark 1 cm. The static electric field that you can pick up from walking on the gound can easily become higher than this. The electric field caused by atmospheric conditions can be much greater than this. It is hard for me to imagine the ion detector measuring an electrical field from a source less than 2 volts under the ground when there are so many stronger electric fields from stray sources in the air where the detector is. I may be wrong, but It would be interesting to see some tests that tell us the answer.

In conclusion, I dont' say that the ion detector does not respond to a buried target. I say only that if it responds to a buried target, then the reason why it responds does not seem to be exactly the same as theories we have heard so far.

[FrancoItaly]

Hi All

I noticed in Ivconic's circuit that there is not capacitor between pin 2/6 and ground of LM555' stage, this capacitor would determine the output frefrequency..

[Dell Winders]

In conclusion, I dont' say that the ion detector does not respond to a buried target. I say only that if it responds to a buried target, then the reason why it responds does not seem to be exactly the same as theories we have heard so far.

In my opinion, the Mineoro, does NOT actually detect the presence of an underground target. It does detect the "field" of the target at the surface above the ground. With other electronic LRL instruments I've detected the discriminated "field's" of concentrations of clusters of Gold from an aircraft at altitudes as much as 3000 feet above the earth.

In the early 1990's a NOVA TV documentary showed a division of NASA had developed the same method of discriminating the "field" of underground anomalies from an aircraft. The difference was we had spent about $70,000 to develop an analog prototype, and the division of NASA had invested over $1 million in a computerized version. We both used conventional geophysical methods and Ground truthing to verify our locations.

The idea of long time buried Gold being detectable vs freshly buried Gold not being detectable was originated by Claude Cochran, an LRL super salesman during the late 1989's as a competetive advertising scheme.

In my experience, It is true that the deeper fresh Gold is buried, the longer it will take for the "Field" to reach the surface where the "field' might be detected. Certain geologic conditions appear to not allow the concentrated earth "field" around some sub-terrain Gold buried even for thousands of years to ever reach the surface and therefore not all Gold will be detectable using this Remote sensing concept.

In my Field testing of the Mineoro, I used a 1 ounce Gokl Krugerand, lieing on the surface of the ground to tune the Mineoro, and specifically to determine if the target SOF was strong enough to be within the Mineoro's operating limitations. When the SOF was strong, the Mineoro, detected the unburied Gold from a distance of 12-15 feet. When SOF conditions were weak, the Mineoro would not detect the "field" of the un-buried Gold, and also, it would not detect the "field" of the long time buried Gold either. This is consistent with All LRL's I've used, or tested, whether electronic, or non-electronic.

At least some understanding of the Physics that are being applied are an integral part to the electronic development this remote sensing concept.

I hope my field experience provides some "food for thought". Good Luck!

"WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, CAN BE DONE" Dell

[Esteban]

Hi IONFINDERS!!!

Some considerations:

1. I have different "proof fields" and sometimes I don't obtain the necessary signal to conclude if work or not work X experimental machine or X Mineoro model. So, my team and I makes short (one day) or large trips (3-4 days) for to examine the situation. As treasure can't find all the days and also as nobody knows where is it, decide to probe this "gadgets" in natural fields. The more secure sites you can probe to respond your devices are battlefields, soldiers encampments, ruins or old houses. In this sites there are real old targets and we can to comprobe the efectivesness or not of different machines.

2. Long distance detector (10, 20, 30, 40 50 m are long distance for me) needs delicate threshold adjustment (sensibility in the limit) in stable point. With this characteristics, is possible to find conductive targets.

3. Very wet ambient shortcircuited the field.

4. Sunny days are better.

5. Ferriferous soils in high iron's concentration (main in zone of iron mines) nulliffy the signal for small items. Don't know for treasure, maybe not.

[J_Player]

Mineoro? We are not discussing the Mineoro principles

Ummm... Dell,

This thread is about an electronic ion detector, not about any Mineoro device. The ion detector we are discussing is wholly an electronic device that works with standard electronic circuitry. There are no bait loads or treasure frequencies involved, only a standard circuit to detect negative ions the same as any commercially available negative ion detector. This machine is in no way related to the Mineoro machine from the previous thread.

But as long as you opened the topic, when will you find time to answer the questions I ased about the Mineoro machine and other LRLs in your TA forum? Please answer the questions in that thread rather than here where we are discussing the refinements of an electronic ion detector.

In my opinion you probably know more about the principles of LRL detection than anyone else using a Mineoro type device. It would be interesting to see how they work in your opinion. Are you aware that at least one of the scientists who built the NASA LRL that discriminated the field of underground anomolities was a closet dowser, hesitant to let his colleagues know that he sometimes used "L" rods to confirm their findings?

[FrancoItaly]

HI J PLAYER

It’s true that ground battery formed by gold and other metals/minerals it gives low voltage, may be 1 volt or less, but for long buried gold the battery takes up 50 meters or plus in all directions and the voltage can appear to the ground surface. 1 volt is 1/100 of the static atmospheric voltage at 1 meter above the ground and it may be detected easy by every home made electronic instrument. Ordinary metal detectors work with signal less than 1 mV…

[J_Player]

Hi Franco,

You may be right. Maybe the ion detector will find the ground battery. Maybe I am wrong and atmospheric interference is not so strong as obscure the field from the ground battery when measuring the air ions. Keep in mind that when ordinary metal detectors measure less than 1 mv signal, this is induced voltage from eddy currents that were caused by the search coil. The ordinary metal detector is detecting an electromagnetic wave that is expected to arrive at a very specific time (PI), or a deformity in the elelctromagnec field of the search coil (non-PI). This is not the same as trying to detect static electric fields 4 feet above the ground.

I think it is time to build the ion detector and find out what it will measure. Then we can see for ourselves what it will measure and will not measure. This machine is very inexpensive to build. most of the parts are cheap or free from salvged equipment. My problem is I do not have the proper facility to construct the circuit. I can build the mechanical part if someone else builds the circuit boards with electronics.

So far nobody except Estseban has given us any practical information how to use this machine, and I think the only way we will learn how it works is to build the detector and learn from experience.

[Dell Winders]

I guess what I am trying to say is that it appears to me that all these types of devices operate on the same principles of physics with slightly different variations of application.

The one common denominator that I have observed is that 18 years of residual effects of Solar magnetic activity greatly affects the operation of all these devices, as well as Magnetometer, and to a lesser degree the depth penetration of conventional metal detectors.

The conditions when these electronic, or non-electronic devices will work, or will not work, has been consistently predictable whether I am using electronic metering, or a pair of Dowsing rods to meter the Strength of Field (SOF) suffecient for these devices to operate.

To put it bluntly, there are magnetic conditions and fluxuations in which none of these devices will function effeciently, or will even work. This can be a problem with testing your design.

I was using the Mineoro, as an example because you were speaking of an Ion detector, which is the scientific principle the Mineoro, claims to be using.

I have never field tested the posted schematic, but If this schematic is indeed intended as a Gold discriminating Ion detector, and comparing it with the Mineoro field results, I suspect it will be affected by the same limitations as all other LRL remote sensing devices, whether electronic, or non-electronic.

Not that I personally care, but I'm trying to be helpful by suggesting it as a consideration in your modifications of componnents to be included in the schematic.

I probably am intruding in the electronic engineering, which admittedly I know nothing about. Sorry! I mean no offense. I'll stay out of it, unless asked. Dell

[ivconic]

Ups!


"First, Ivconic should build the detectror circuit and tune it and test it to insure that
it works for collecting ions. Then send only the circuit boards to me along with trim pots
connected (this is to make inexpensive shipping cost)."
Huh! A whole cost to build that ions detector would be $20-$30, for you J PLayer.Since I am
living in Europe, in Serbia, what do you mean, how much it is gonna take for me to send to
you assmebled pcb!? Incuding shipment and anoyance through post and other stuff. Serbia is not
even a member of european community, so there is no way to send enything by usual channels
like it is a case in the rest of Europe.Costs would overcome $100 and more!Forget about that.
If you want to check that device than you have to build it yourself.
I made it for some time. It is working and it is detecting ions for real.
I checked it as follows:
I made a long time ago a Tesla coil, which is producing a high voltage, over the 5000 volts.
I added to it a typical tv cascade to obtain higher voltage, over 17 000 Volts. Output is
connected to a metal ball. In it's nearby (aprox. 15cm) is a ground plate.So when is switched on
it produce a giant sparks, and you can see a voltage crossing through the air....etc.
I guess all of you already know about Tesla's coils, and how they are working.
It is producing a clouds of ions in no time! In a minute or two my lab is full of them and i can
even feel and smell ionizied air. It has pleasant taste an it is good for respiration for a
10-20 minutes per day. It is a sort of ozone. Now, what you have to do is to switch on the
detector and you gonna detect ions easy. Because the concentration in a closed space is on
a high level, i repeated a test outdoor of my house. The detection is still good,loud and
clear.I was rambled backwards for about 20 metres and the detection was still unchanged.
On 21. metre the detection decay a bit by bit as i rambled more.After aprox. 25 metres there
was no detection any more. So it seems that it's shows all the results by this test.
About burried metals i don't know really. I do have a sort of test field with coins,metal
pieces and one big,old transmission from some used car, burried in about 2 metres deep.
I tried to detect it with no results at all! It was some clicking in the speaker but as any
where else on the field, nothing like a real detection!
That's why i posted some ideas about improving late stages on the device.
I think that input stage is good enough.I think that problem is with a further processing.
One more thing, during the test i switched off a 555 part of the device, and guess what?
The detection was attenuated appreciably, and some other weak noises occured.
So the 555(polarisation of dish) is acting very important role in the project.
Right now that device is reassembled on the desk and wait for improvements. I was thinking
to do that by my own, but have no idea.So i decide to stop for a while and wait for some
better solutions. Since i am working parallel on several projects like resistivity meter,
copy of some IB Minelab, one MD3007 and one PI, i am very abstracted to think only on
this project. That's why i posted schematic here and wait for your opinions. And it seems
very productive, all of your posts shows some good ideas here.
I am very restless to see somebody's else expirience with this ionic detector.
......
FrancoItaly
"I noticed in Ivconic's circuit that there is not capacitor between pin 2/6 and ground
of LM555' stage, this capacitor would determine the output frefrequency.."
JESUS !!!! It is true ! I am sorry i missed that! Here is a reclamation....

regards!

[J_Player]

Hi Ivconic,

You are right. It is not a good idea to send a circuit. The cost of the parts is not a problem for me. I cannot build this circuit because I do not have the facilities to build and test it. It will be another 6 months before I have the proper tools and test meters to make simple circuit boards with electronics like the ion detector. So we will need to rely on someone else to build and test this machine.

It seems to me that this machine will only detect ions. If we want more information from the signal then first we must know what kind of information we are looking for. I expect many of the variations will depend on where we move the dish. But maybe there are signal variations that come from different targets. The variations in signal from different targets can only be found by experimenting with known targets.

One idea you could try is to put an iron rod in the ground 2 meters away from where you buried the targets, and see if the detector will find the electric field from the "ground battery" as Franco says.

[J_Player]

Hi Dell,

Thanks for the tips. You are answering some of the questions I asked in another thread. I suppose you have chosen to post your answers here instead of the TA forum. Your comments do appear to apply to the negative ion detector, but they are really comments aboout LRLs in general. In order that you will have a proper place to elaborate, I will open a new thread, restating what you have said about SOF and LRLs where we can ask questions without straying away from the ion detector. Your information should be good for all LRLs that work on the principles you are talking about, and will be a valuable resource for all who want to know the theory of how LRLs work from an expert with decades of experience. Look for the new thread.

Thanks in advance for the help in LRL theory

[FrancoItaly]

Other thoughts about Ivconics' ion detector

Hi All,

I don't think that Ivconics' ion detector is only a traditional instrument, I find very interesting the first stage of LM555, this is not only a way to increase tha battery voltage as we can have a better efficiency with a more suitable frequency, but the very low frequency plays an important role. I'm sure that on the Dish there is a little AC component and I ask to Ivconic if He can meausure the voltage on the Dish with a analogue voltmeter: the needle should be to tremble.
I have tested a LM358 circuit with many trasformers ( I have not a old modem to sacrifice!) at very low frequency and the output voltage is very poor, only few volts and I doubt that it's possible to obtain 15 volt with a frequency of only 1 Hz.