Ivconic's Negative Ion Detector circuit

[Esteban]

Is good info?:

http://www.trifield.com/SurfaceDCVoltmeter.htm#Sensor


The above is from main page:

http://www.trifield.com/

[J_Player]

An electrostatic field... Errr, Exceeewse meeeeee... a static electric field....?

Now lets get straight about an electrostatic field: I am talking about a volume of space that contains an electric charge that is different than the surrounding 3-dimensional space. You can call it an electrostatic field, or static electric or whatever you want. But I am referring to a volume of space that has an electic charge different than its surroundings. I am also talking about a charge that does not change noticably over a period of perhaps a minute or longer. Thus, it does not have a measurable frequency component. Having said that, we are focusing on static electric charges, not electromagnetic waves.

In the earth's atmosphere at ground level, we find an atmosphere of nitrogen and oxygen plus some other gasses in lesser amounts. Static electric fields are usually accompanied by oxygen ions, or ozone. There are other things that can cause static electric fields in the air, including ions of other gasses, electrons, and voltages created by electronic devices.
But wherever you find a static electric field, you will also find ionized gas particles in the volume of the field. No matter how slight, they are there and can be measured. The only exception is in a perfect vacum, where there are no molecules of any kind.

Ruling out a perfect vacum on the surface of the earth where LRL detectorists are seeking treasures, we could agree that the only ions to be expected floating in the air are ions of oxygen or hydrogen, or nitrogen, and maybe a few ions of other air constituents. Anybody who says there are gold ions hovering in a cloud above buried gold will soon become a laughing stock after a survey with an ion detector is made.

Nuff said

[J_Player]

PS. If I am wrong about the cloud of gold ions hovering in the air... then we could get rich with Ivconic's $50 ion detector. we could collect the hovering gold ions from the cloud to plate the antenna. Who knows.... maybe we collect several ounces of gold ions reconstituted into matallic gold in less than a day... Think so?

[J_Player]

Gold oxides? Dang.. was I ever wrong.

I checked it out sum more... and guess what.. Carl is right. Gold does not form oxides. Well, sorta right.. gold oxide does exist. You can make it in an atmosphere of 15,000 psi or higher pretty easy. But not so easy on the average surface of the earth. So I guess I am wrong (hate when that happens).

The gold compounds you can expect to find under the ground are naturally occuring tellurides and chlorides, with chlorides most likely to be present in the soil nearby a metallic gold target. You may also expect to find salts of the other alloying metals in the gold target such as copper, silver, lead and others. These metals form salts in the surrounding ground, and can leach out of the gold host to make a gold nugget more pure at its surface. These salts in the vicinity of the target could also be responsible for the reported "halo" effect by some detectorists. Here are some more interesting facts about gold:

1. It is estimated that all the gold in the world, so far refined, could be placed in a single cube 60 ft. on a side.
2. The most common gold compounds are auric chloride and chlorauric acid, the latter being used in photography for toning the silver image.
3. 1 oz. of gold can be beaten out to 300 square feet.
4. Gold has 18 isotopes; 198Au, with a half-life of 2.7 days, is used for treating cancer and other diseases. Disodium aurothiomalate is administered intramuscularly as a treatment for arthritis.
5. A mixture of one part nitric acid with three of hydrochloric acid is called aqua regia (because it dissolves gold, the King of Metals).

Question: How important is gold compared to your youngest umarried daughter?

[Carl-NC]

Gold does not form oxides.

Nor does buried gold generate ions.

[J_Player]

True, gold does not generate ions.
But aren't gold ions formed in some small amount as a result of a chemical reaction in damp soil?

Isn't there a form of oxidation on the surface of metallic gold surrounded by chlorine salts in solution? From what I read, a very small amount of gold on the surface of a buried metallic gold object will react with neighboring chlorine salts (sodium chloride, magnesium chloride, etc) to form gold chloride in acidic soil. This can happen anywhere gold is under the surface of the ground with moisture from ocean water, or even fresh water if chlorides exist in the soil where the gold is. But before the gold can oxidize to the form of gold chloride, a gold atom must first lose one or more elecrons (become ionized) to become soluable in the damp ground. Once in solution, it is free to combine with a chloride ion or stay in solution until the soil dries, where it invariably combines as dry gold chloride salt. This trace of surface corrosion on gold happens to such a minute degree that it is not detectableble by visual inspection even after the gold object is buried for centuries.

As long as the soil is damp, I would suspect there is a small trace of gold ions with millions more copper ions and chlorine ions, and ions from other minerals in the soil around the buried metal alloy. However, I can imagine no way these ions would escape into the air and become airborne gold ions. We are talking about negible traces of gold ions, and I would expect measurable concentrations of other alloying metal ions from the target, such as copper.

The presence of chloride ions in a soil sample can be easily identified by putting the soil sample in a cup of distilled water. Then add a drop of 1% silver nitrate solution. If a white cloud forms where the drop falls, this indicates silver ions from the nitrate changing to white silver chloride salt. While this does not prove there are gold ions in the sample, it does prove the soil around the buried gold contains chloride ions. If the soil sample was damp when it was dug up, these ions were in the ground around the buried gold. If the soil was dry, then the chlorine ions were combined as salts in the soil.

This is basic chemistry that gives some degree of credibility to the "halo theory". It also would support theories of "ground batteries" caused by buried metals. I still wonder how anyone can determine the presence of miniscule amounts of gold ions buried in a sea of millions times more ions of the other local minerals, by sampling in the air some distance away. Detecting these trace amounts of gold ions requires nothing short of atomic absorption/emission methods, or gamma spectroscopy.

It would seem to me that the only "halo" easily found by a detectorist would be a halo of copper chloride or other easily corroded metal from a target like salts of tin or iron rust. I would like to see some proof that this halo really exists besides hearsay. It would be intresting to see a detector give a large target signal over a coin, then after a coin is dug up, to re-bury it and take another look at the detector reading.

[Esteban]

Gold, silver, copper, bronze and another good conductive item buried for long time has around it electrical field. FrancoItaly is correct in his theory of battery.

[ivconic]

....


First I am very sorry cose left this thread for a longer time. I had/have some
objective problems and have to manage them first.Second reason is that network
connections are very bad these days here, at my place....
So i missed your posts and chance to take active part in it....
"Hello IVCONIC,
What you say on this? Do you have any evidence that your circuit also detects
electrostatic fields? I suppose its possible that the antenna will shield out the
ES fields and also seperate/filter the ions so only ions get to the center probe
antenna. If that is the case I'd go for the J_Player circuit mod. I KNOW that 3819
FET is extremely sensitive. It will detect a flea scratching his ear from 10 feet (haha).
Goldfinder"
BF245 too....I've tested it many times.About es field....well it is much more
complicated than it looks at the first sight. Can you define ES in relation with
ions? I can't.It will take an osciloscope monitoring to notice some minor es
influence on the ion detection. Dish is rejecting oposite polarity but es...I do
not have evidence.
"I think the term "electrostatic field" is a misnomer. We have electric fields, and
magnetic fields. Either one may be static or dynamic. So we can have a "static electric
field" or a "dynamic electric field." Also, I don't think you can have an ion without an
electric field, though you can have an electric field without an ion. When ions are in
(relative) motion, the E-field is no longer static."
Carl

Of course! I agree. I am using es term just as bad habit although it is mismatch.
When dealing with ions we have "very" dynamic field...
"Now, take a look an issue of "Gold Prospecting" magazine... look up the ad for the
(Electroscope) Gravitator... what is that device advertised to do?
Nor does buried gold generate ions..."
One thing for sure - left you without money!
"Gold, silver, copper, bronze and another good conductive item buried for long time has
around it electrical field. FrancoItaly is correct in his theory of battery."
Esteban
That is the catch! I noticed that phenomena many times but, is it electrical field or
ionic field or something else, i do not really know! I doubt it is ionic field at all.
Besides, i tried my ion detector on gold and silver and ... nothing! I have test field
with burried items(for testing detecting equipment).Some of those items are burried for
longer than a few years there, so i guess it has to "evolute" some "field" by that time.
And truth is that there is a better detection on "older" items in the ground, but,thanks
to "what"...i do not know.
JPlayer is on the right track! COnnecting detector to osciloscope is giving you a various
results and very rich monitoring of receiving signal.My problem is that my o.scope is some
Philips 30 years old and heavy, with a big box, so it is almost impossible to use it outdor
on the field.I can only experiment in the lab.But still i noticed much more than a simple
"clicking" from spkr. when using o.scope.
...........................
I have a portable ECG device with a cathode screen, batt. operated, with 5 inputs.....
I was thinking somehow to use it instead of o.scope....!!!(it is a sort of very slow scope)
Any suggestions or mods !?
regards!

[J_Player]

Hi Ivconic,

If you have radio transmitter experience, maybe another idea is to send the output signal from the detector to a a small radio transmitter then recieve the signal in the lab where the oscilloscope is. You could then have a friend sample the targets while you watch the signals on the scope.

I doubt there is any ion field to detect around the targets, but my hunch is you will find a disturbance in the patterns of existing EM waves above the target. I think that when you remove a target, you will find the EM wave patern will be restored to more similar like the surrounding EM wave patterns.

The waves I am talking about are mostly low frequency radio waves, maybe down to several hundred hertz, but maybe high frequency too. This is just a hunch, but I think a buried target or underground stream will cause a disturbance of some existing frequencies of EM waves. I would expect you find the easiest to detect EM disturbances following along the the edges of the stream like a vertical curtain. These are probably small variations in signal, but may be bigger than I think.

Scientists using isotope detectors found that he normal background radiation from deep in the earth becomes very weak over a body of underground water, then becomes stronger than normal at the edges of the the water. This happens to be similar to reading that dowsers say they find. But ruling out increased airborne ions or static fields, this leaves us dynamic fields, which are EM waves, or possibly other dynamic fields related to gravity or little-observed geopyhsics.

I don't know what the full mechanism is, but I suspect that there will be a disturbance in the normal pattern of EM waves due to the buried object, similar to how above ground objects can create disturbances in radio waves.
The scientists who use isotope detectors are not looking at EM waves, but the precautions they take seem like the same precautions that a radio engineer would take into consideration when measuring the characteristics of transmitted waves.

Some hints from the scientists with their isotope detectors:

1. The best readings can be found before 10:00am and after 2:00 pm. The X-rays of the sun fluctuate causing false readings between 10:00am and 2:00pm.

2. It is good to compare your measurements taken the same time the next day. This can confirm the reading and rule out a possible spurious interference. Never repeat the reading at a different time of day.

3. Magnetic storms can cause large fluctuations in the background readings. It is good not to take measurements at these times. Wait till there is no heavy sun storm activity.

If you wanted to measure weak EM waves, you probably know many methods. Your ion detector could probably be used as a sensitive detector if the antenna was replaced with a coil. Luckily, the FETs are fairly high frequency, and can amplify any range you might want to look at, with easy bandpass tuning with a coil and old style radio variable capacitor for lower frequencies.

[michael]

Hi to all.

...Isn't there a form of oxidation on the surface of metallic gold surrounded by chlorine salts in solution? From what I read, a very small amount of gold on the surface of a buried metallic gold object will react with neighboring chlorine salts (sodium chloride, magnesium chloride, etc) to form gold chloride in acidic soil. This can happen anywhere gold is under the surface of the ground with moisture from ocean water, or even fresh water if chlorides exist in the soil where the gold is. But before the gold can oxidize to the form of gold chloride, a gold atom must first lose one or more elecrons (become ionized) to become soluable in the damp ground...

your statements about the Gold interaction and reactions can be true as we and you know gold will be solved in the 3+1 HCl-HNo3 compound and the HCl role is more important. presumably in soil Cl ion + H2O gives HCl( it takes long time to happen this).
and this time it can affect on gold and forms a halo or another energetic thing
huummm? I don't know exactly.
As Esteban before had stated these by e-mailing to me;"...In places where
the terrain is more conductive, salty terrain is possible to find fresh gold. This fresh gold only is detectable very short distance,3 or 4 meters...From the vehicle, in salty terrain the PDC 205 sensitivity is incredible...The only terrain I found a single coin from 40 m from the detector was in salty soils, in the salty terrain of Chaco, and in the proximity of the target, you cannot enter..."

But one thing to think is DELL experience by mineoro. he stated:
"...I used a 1 ounce Gold Kruger and, lying 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..."

It has no accordance with long time buried objects theory. Then what's the
mineoro detection Basis?! May be can conclude around a buried object
even a nonmagnetizable metal will form a kind of field different from
electromagnetic fields, probably the earth magnetic field can be efficacious.
Please Pardon my impudence I speculated it can give a thought.

[J_Player]

Dell has made a number of comments indicating he does not find any difference between long buried gold and recently buried gold, but he never actually made a definite statement to that effect. I would think he does not recognize any halo effect on gold. This is an example of where different LRL users have different opinions about how the devices work. Keep in mind, Dell does not agree with many of the claims made by LRL manufacturers. His views on how LRLs work is not the same as what Mineoro says.

Based on what I have heard from a lot of LRL users as well as conventioinal detectorists, It seems there are a lot of people that notice this "halo effect" which seems to disappear after they dig up the buried object. Because of the numbers of people who report finding halos, I consider it a worthwhile lead to follow in discovering the secrets of locating buried targets.

The chemistry involved is pretty basic: In addition to using the known solvents for gold, you can easily create gold ions in solution by putting a gold object in hydrochloric acid, then adding a litle household bleach (sodium hypochlorite). When the chlorine gas dissipates, you will have positively charged gold ions in solution, which would dry into gold chloride. But the available chemistry of soil is not conducive to producing gold ions in any measurable maounts, even if the best conditions of acid soil wet with ocean brine. The necessary acid constituants of th soil could be HCl or other acids caused by mineral reactions or from organic sources.

My opinion is any halo detected is caused by the other alloying metals which leach out from the surface of the gold target and into the soil. This is known to happen in buried copper pipes which can develop leaks due to corrosion of the interior or exterior surface of the pipe in contact with mineralized water or damp mineralized soil. There also is a "battery" component involved where dissimilar metals are present, such as solder joints, or connections to iron pipes, that rapidly accelerates corrosion and ion production. It should be noted that any "halo effect" may also involve elements of an electric current flowing, or voltage in the halo vicinity as well as the presence of ions. While any electrical properties in the "halo" region would be small, the effect they have on a detector search coil might be very noticable.

Here are some pictures of american copper clad pennies dug up from less than 8 inches in the sand of a California beach where the ocean water keeps the coins wet. Once a pinhole leak allows ocean water into the zinc core area, the battery action rapidly accelerates the corrosion process. Even after all the zinc is gone, the copper will continue to corrode untill all that remains is chloride salts of copper, disolved away into the ocean. There is no halo expected in this case because the coins are surrounded by moving water that is regularly replaced with every tide.

These coins have been in the sand for less than 3 months. There is considerable corrosion, with the corroded metals changed to ions which combine to form salts in the wet surroundings. If the water was not replenished daily, we could expect a sizable weight of metal to become concentrated as ions in the near vicinity of the coins. These ions would convert to salts or remain as ions suspended in the damp soil.
A simple way to test and find out if there is heavily ionized soil in a "halo" around a buried target is to find a target that you suspect has a halo (buried coin with good percent copper or tin). Then dig up the target carefully, so the target and neighboring soil for 6 inches around is not disturbed. When the target plug is removed, put it in a plastic flower pot like a potted plant, with spare loose soil from the same hole to fill the area around the plug. Set the pot on clean ground that has no other buried targets nearby to iunterfere. Then you can perform the following tests:

1) Use a conventional metal detecetor to measure the signal strength and detection range from all angles and record the measurements. Next, pinpoint the exact location of the target inside the plug and carefully probe into the plug to where the coin is and remove it with long nose pliers, without disturbing the plug any more than necessary. Close the hole after removing the coin and check the plug again with the metal detector. You might find some evidence of a signal from a "residual halo" of ionized metal salts. But maybe not.

2) Try putting the coin back in the same location in the plug. See if you get the same readings as before.

3) Dig a second plug the same size as the first at a hole neighboring where you found the coin, and put the coin in the new "clean" plug, then see what reading s the detector shows. Be sure to dig the new "clean plug" the same as you dug the plug with the coin, and put it in an identical plastic flower pot. USe the same long-nose pliers to insert the coin into the plug.

4) Repeat the whole experiment, with cleaning the surface of the coin before returning it to the plug.

Final note: You can create a coin with a halo by taking a copper coin and burying it in a container of soil to which you add just enough ocean water to keep it damp. Put a cover on the container and let it sit for a few weeks. I have an up-comming "mayonnaise jar test" for coin halos which will begin in a few weeks, involving lots of mayonnaise jars and coins. I exect it will take several months for any halo to develop, if it does at all. If you have any test suggestions, let me know in the next few weeks.

[Jim]

Based on what I have heard from a lot of LRL users as well as conventioinal detectorists, It seems there are a lot of people that notice this "halo effect" which seems to disappear after they dig up the buried object. Because of the numbers of people who report finding halos, I consider it a worthwhile lead to follow in discovering the secrets of locating buried targets.

The halo theory is a myth. Gold is inert, silver is dang near inert and it takes hundreds of years for copper coins to start down any path of deterioration in normal soil*.



“Disappearing targets” are typically novice detectorists that do not know how to adjust the metal detector properly, and/or misinterpret a false signal.



Hope this helps, Jim

*normal soil – dirt

[michael]

The halo theory is a myth. Gold is inert, silver is dang near inert ...


“Disappearing targets” are typically novice detectorists that do not know how to adjust the metal detector properly, and/or misinterpret a false signal.

No. it's not true.

the halo existence has practically demonstrated. what has been proven practically is more reliable and higher than theoretic analysis’s.
I myself have found a jar full of silver powder(very ancient) by my PI MD at the 5 feet depth. the halo was at least 8 × 8 feet around the target whereas the target(jar) size was about 1.5 ×1 × 0.5 feet.

[J_Player]

Hi Jim,

What you posted didn't really help. You stated that "Gold is inert, silver is dang near inert", with no evidence or testing to support your statement. Are you aware that if gold was inert, there would be no such thing as gold telluride or a number of chlorides of gold and hydrated chlorides in nature? Don't silver dishes tarnish in the air? These are not inert metals. They are considered noble metals which are less likely to corrode than others, but both silver and gold will form ions and combine with other elements if the surrounding environment is favorable.

But I am open to the idea that the "halo effect" is a myth if I can see some credible demonstration that it is in fact a myth. I am also open to the idea that the "halo effect" exists if I can see a demonstration to show that it does.

So far all I heard is a lot of hearsay, with NO evidence to support the "halo effect" exists or doesn't. How about some real proof? I am planning a series of "mayonnaise jar tests with different composition soils to see if any halo effect develops over a period of time. I really want to know the answer. I don't think the answer can be determined by blindly believing your favorite group of voices claiming that they have the answer, with no proof to support their claims.

My mayonnaise jar experiments are not designed to be definitive scientific proof, but a quick, cheap indicator to see if further testing is warranted. I invite you to post your input on methods to conduct these tests that I plan to start in a few weeks. My current plan is to bury US pennies and US dimes in the center of mayonnaise jars packed with different soil samples. I plan to survey these samples with a VLF detector and a PI detector from all angles and create a 3 dimensional chart showing signal strength at different points in time. There will be other tests performed at the end of a 3-month period which will examine the soil after the coin is removed, including chemical testing for free ions and metal salts.

I hope you do not take offense at my disagreeing with the lack of foundation for your statements, but I am trying to bring some credibility to the hearsay we are constantly exposed to.

[Carl-NC]

True, gold does not generate ions.
But aren't gold ions formed in some small amount as a result of a chemical reaction in damp soil?

I doubt it...

Isn't there a form of oxidation on the surface of metallic gold surrounded by chlorine salts in solution? From what I read, a very small amount of gold on the surface of a buried metallic gold object will react with neighboring chlorine salts (sodium chloride, magnesium chloride, etc) to form gold chloride in acidic soil. This can happen anywhere gold is under the surface of the ground with moisture from ocean water, or even fresh water if chlorides exist in the soil where the gold is.

This might happen in unusual circumstances, with elevated temperature... but would not occur with gold buried in average soil.

As long as the soil is damp, I would suspect there is a small trace of gold ions with millions more copper ions and chlorine ions, and ions from other minerals in the soil around the buried metal alloy. However, I can imagine no way these ions would escape into the air and become airborne gold ions. We are talking about negible traces of gold ions, and I would expect measurable concentrations of other alloying metal ions from the target, such as copper.

I will certainly agree with you on that...

This is basic chemistry that gives some degree of credibility to the "halo theory".... It would seem to me that the only "halo" easily found by a detectorist would be a halo of copper chloride...

I doubt that copper chloride is detectable by a metal detector.

- Carl