some cosiderations

[Nihil Roma Maius]

Man, you're confused. What is proof? If you post your detector with you, I can say: this is not proof, you make a scenification, tricks.

[Qiaozhi]

Who needs Electronics?



No Batteries, No electronics, weighs 4 1/2 ozs. Discriminates to, and detects Gold only at ranges to 100 yards. That's a fact!

NOT FOR SALE! Dell

How anyone could take this seriously is just amazing.
There's enough subject matter here for a thesis in psychology.

No batteries, no electronics ... no brain!
Get real.

[Max]

Man, you're confused. What is proof? If you post your detector with you, I can say: this is not proof, you make a scenification, tricks.

Hi,
I'm confused, sure!

As I said, I can post tons of fake pictures like yours here... but why I have to ?

That picture above means just one thing:

NOTHING OF NOTHING.

But why if I ask Esteban you answer for him ? That's funny man.
Why when I challenge you, Esteban answer ?

Give us facts and I'll belive what you said.

When I claim my coil could get a coin at few (really few) cms more than an original Tesoro's coil I say something that everyone, with a bit of patience, tools, some wire and goodwill can test using the informations I've provided.

Test yourself if don't belive words. Would cost you some (2hours for me) work and a bit of cheapy stuff !

But when you claim YOU CAN DETECT A COIN ON SURFACE, USING A METAL DETECTOR, FROM METERS AWAY

than give no informations, no patents (oh yeah there are... but aren't international ! WHY ?), no documentation, no model/brand refs, anything good to test ourself and see with our eyes if what you're talking about is truth of just a novel...

DO YOU THINK YOU GAIN CREDIT HERE ?
WHY ME OR OTHERS HAVE TO TRUST YOU ?
SAME FOR ESTEBAN.
SAME FOR HUNG.
SAME FOR DELL.
SAME FOR ANYONE ACTING SAME WAY.

I don't want be polemic here, say everytime your are a joker or clown...
that you belong to a LRL-clan or LRL-tribe... of nonsense.
Not my intention, belive me.

But what have I think ?

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

More details to consider if you want to build a real LRL

We recently learned there are trace amounts of ions in the ground dissolved from various metals including gold, platinum and other treasures. We discovered that reseachers found there is a vertical column of ionized soil that travels from the buried metal to the surface soil, where the metal ions finally become bound with chemicals that de-ionize them. While this ion concentration is in the parts per billion, technicians are able to measure the anomalies from the surface and pinpoint the locations where there is gold or other ores under the ground.

We also know there is a 100v/m electric field in the air that can be expected to show faint anomalies in the vicinity of any soil that has metal ions in it, among other soil variations. Does this describe enough physical characteristics of buried gold to suggest a method of building an electronic long range locator? Many have tried, but complain about extreme unreliability measuring static fields. So what hope is there to locate the hidden gold under the ground from long range?

The answer lies in more knowledge of the details of the physics and electrical dynamics of buried metals. So far we looked at ions in the soil and the electric field in the air. But what else is going on with this electric field and buried metals? What else is happening that might produce some signal we can measure?

Atmospheric current anomalies
First, consider we have 2000 amps leaking from the atmosphere to the earth. Roughly half of this current leaks through thunderstorms in the form of lightning, and is not available as a uniform leakage through the atmosphere. This leaves only about 1000 amps leaking through the earth's fair weather skies. A quick calculation shows that this amounts to about 2 microamps per km², not much current. Now this current is being forced straight down by the electric field generated high in the atmosphere, but it is influenced by the earth's magnetic field. Thus, this current does not flow down in a straight line. The magnetic field distorts the path of this current flow. In fact, researchers discovered the majority of the current is leaking through the atmosphere near the north and south magnetic poles, with a lesser amount near the equator. This research would suggest that any instruments designed to measure anomalies of the current leaking from the sky will have a much weaker signal to measure in locations away from the magnetic poles of the earth. But this is a generalization. Much more precise values can be found by consulting an electron density map of the earth's lower atmosphere.

Electric field strength variations
To further complicate this current density, the electric field strength changes throughout the day as well as changing due to solar influences and magnetic storms. The electric field exists due to a difference in charge of the ionosphere and the earth. The ionosphere is charged mostly from "solar wind". But throughout the day, there are different space energies that contribute to different regions of the atmosphere's electric charge. We find that on an average, the minimum electric field is found about 4:00am, and the maximum comes at about 7:00pm. But there are big deviations from this average depending on what part of the world you live. Charts showing the daily electric field fluctuations in Asia, Africa, and North America bear no resemblance to to each other except they all have a daily cycle.

Near-surface ion generators
The planetary boundary layer is the first few kilometers above the surface of the ground. This boundary layer is charged mostly by cosmic rays. But near the surface there is also some ionization by decays of natural gases emanating from the soil surface and by radiation emitted directly from the surface. This ionization from radioactive sources depends on the soil and geological structure as well as the meteorological dispersal rate. This boundary layer ionization decreases rapidly with altitude, and becomes less than the cosmic ray contribution at 1 km altitude.

Other sources of near-surface ionization come from mists and aerosols from waterfalls and ocean waves, man made sprays, combustion processes, lightning, point discharge or corona discharge, and friction from dust, snow or volcanic ejections. If you want to measure ionization, consider these sources that will distort your measurement of the ions in the air. This can help explain why the ion detectors show different measurements near a city or a beach than in the mountains.

Troposphere layer ionization
The troposphere layer is more complicated. This is the layer where trace air gases exist in abundance. Clouds in the troposphere act as a sink for small ions and will alter the distribution of ions. Clouds can also create a large decrease in local conductivity of the atmosphere, thus changing the electric field that you try to measure on the ground. Some clouds are also able to move large masses of ions through convection currents within them.
As we increase in altitude to the stratosphere (up to 50km), we see the main source of ionization is from cosmic rays. This is the altitude where sunspots and solar flares can reduce the cosmic ray influence by as much as 50%. These solar effects can last for hours to days. The degree of cosmic ray influence also depends on the geomagnetic latitude. Researchers also found that within the lower part of the troposphere, mountain peaks play a role in current density. Because they are closer to the source of the charge, they tend to collect more of the current from the sky than a section of land at sea level.

Mesosphere ionization
The mesosphere (50-85 km) is where ultraviolet light ionizes nitric oxide during daylight hours. Oxygen is also photo ionized in smaller amounts, along with small amounts of solar X-ray ionization. When we look above 80 km altitude, we see free electrons can exist, where mostly nitrogen and oxygen ions exist below. These free electrons are highly mobile, and make this a very conductive layer.

As we look higher than 85 km, we find extreme ultraviolet radiation from the sun is ionizing nitrogen and oxygen. This is where we see the biggest influence of solar sunspots from the 11 year cycle and the 27 day rotation of the sun, and this is thought to be the most powerful source of charging the atmosphere around the earth. We find that auroral precipitation is responsible for large variations in ion and electron densities at higher latitudes.

Is this starting to sound like rocket science? This was just a brief overview of the basics of the atmospheric electric field. There are many other intricate mechanisms that complicate these processes. All these mechanisms should be considered when designing an electronic long range locator. For people who want to measure anomalies of the electric field in the air above buried metal, you cannot ignore the variations in electric field caused by the mechanisms of the sun and other space energies. The relative charge of the air will vary depending on the solar activity, the weather, dust and waves, the geology of the local ground, the time of day etc, etc. Remember, the metal ions found in the ground were measured in the parts per billion and less. Consider the signal to noise ratio of any instrument that must measure electric field anomalies in the air above this trace of metal ionization.

Why your Zahori didn't work so well
This may begin to explain why some locators will work with some limited success in one area, but not another. Or why it worked good last month, but not now. In order for an electric field anomaly locator to work acceptably, It must be able to compensate for the sources of extraneous influences on the electric field. These extraneous electric field influences are considered noise when they are not part of an anomaly caused by the electrochemical properties of the buried metal. Compensating can be accomplished in the form of checking the sources of noise and making manual adjustments, or by electronic filters and self-correcting circuitry that cancels the noise sources. In some cases it is not possible to electronically cancel or filter the noise. If you want to design a LRL that is not influenced by variations in the earth's electric field, then perhaps you will look to measuring some other phenomenon (or combination of phenomena) that is not primarily dependent on the strength and stability of the electric field of the earth.

Where to next?
Is there another way? Of course there is. We may want to take another look at the strange space energies that are charging the atmosphere. Perhaps there is something buried in the details of those mechanisms that we have overlooked, that will not be subject to the fluctuations of solar flares etc. We can also take a closer look at the nuclear emmissions that come from within the earth, and the coexistence of telluric earth current flows, and at the way the earth's magnetic field interacts with these as well as the chemical processes involved with the dissolution and ionization of the buried metal. But that's a whole 'nuther story for another time.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Seden]

Good Work J Player!!

Man that's alot of research you just layed out there,thank you. I have looked at many patents that utilize either magnetotelluric signals or one that used the effect of solar winds which was 1hz and below for geophysical prospecting.
Once it can be determined close up in a test bed the frequencies of a particular metal, you can use video intergrating technique from Radar. This was told to me by a Hughes Aircraft Engineer whereby you take the signal and delay it by one cycle and add it to itself using a summer (dual gate mosfet would work nicely for this like a 40673 or 3n211). I'm kinda partial to the 40673 as there quite stable and have a good S21 (S parameter for those not familiar).

Regarding Telluric Currents, I read a study whereby a couple engineers monitored the tellurc currents generated by ocean waves crashing and went further and further away from the beach and tracked the signal over 100 miles away!

Now were getting somewhere in all this spilling of ink as it were.

Randy

[mosha]

Great Efforts

Great Efforts J_P

keep going,

Is this explain why Mineoro LRL only work at brazil.

regards,

[Max]

Great Efforts J_P

keep going,

Is this explain why Mineoro LRL only work at brazil.

regards,

Hi mosha,
are you sure they work in Brazil ?
I have my dubts.

Self-convincing in the best case, fraud intentions in the worst case.

If that things work e.g. in Brazil, why they don't give a public demonstration (like the challenge) there in Brazil that these things really work ?
I mean TV, superparty trusted witness, USA guests etc etc

All the show !

I'm skeptic that anyone could demonstrate this stuff work even in that places.

Also I've read all e.g. Hung (also Esteban and others) stuff regarding bad work e.g. due to solar activity and humidity there in Brazil (and SA in general)... but then ? Even there things are not sure !
You never can say if you'll find anything !

So why you could say this stuff really work there ???

You can't.

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

More details to consider if you want to build a real LRL

We recently learned there are trace amounts of ions in the ground dissolved from various metals including gold, platinum and other treasures. We discovered that reseachers found there is a vertical column of ionized soil that travels from the buried metal to the surface soil, where the metal ions finally become bound with chemicals that de-ionize them. While this ion concentration is in the parts per billion, technicians are able to measure the anomalies from the surface and pinpoint the locations where there is gold or other ores under the ground.

We also know there is a 100v/m electric field in the air that can be expected to show faint anomalies in the vicinity of any soil that has metal ions in it, among other soil variations. Does this describe enough physical characteristics of buried gold to suggest a method of building an electronic long range locator? Many have tried, but complain about extreme unreliability measuring static fields. So what hope is there to locate the hidden gold under the ground from long range?

The answer lies in more knowledge of the details of the physics and electrical dynamics of buried metals. So far we looked at ions in the soil and the electric field in the air. But what else is going on with this electric field and buried metals? What else is happening that might produce some signal we can measure?

Atmospheric current anomalies
First, consider we have 2000 amps leaking from the atmosphere to the earth. Roughly half of this current leaks through thunderstorms in the form of lightning, and is not available as a uniform leakage through the atmosphere. This leaves only about 1000 amps leaking through the earth's fair weather skies. A quick calculation shows that this amounts to about 2 microamps per km², not much current. Now this current is being forced straight down by the electric field generated high in the atmosphere, but it is influenced by the earth's magnetic field. Thus, this current does not flow down in a straight line. The magnetic field distorts the path of this current flow. In fact, researchers discovered the majority of the current is leaking through the atmosphere near the north and south magnetic poles, with a lesser amount near the equator. This research would suggest that any instruments designed to measure anomalies of the current leaking from the sky will have a much weaker signal to measure in locations away from the magnetic poles of the earth. But this is a generalization. Much more precise values can be found by consulting an electron density map of the earth's lower atmosphere.

Electric field strength variations
To further complicate this current density, the electric field strength changes throughout the day as well as changing due to solar influences and magnetic storms. The electric field exists due to a difference in charge of the ionosphere and the earth. The ionosphere is charged mostly from "solar wind". But throughout the day, there are different space energies that contribute to different regions of the atmosphere's electric charge. We find that on an average, the minimum electric field is found about 4:00am, and the maximum comes at about 7:00pm. But there are big deviations from this average depending on what part of the world you live. Charts showing the daily electric field fluctuations in Asia, Africa, and North America bear no resemblance to to each other except they all have a daily cycle.

Near-surface ion generators
The planetary boundary layer is the first few kilometers above the surface of the ground. This boundary layer is charged mostly by cosmic rays. But near the surface there is also some ionization by decays of natural gases emanating from the soil surface and by radiation emitted directly from the surface. This ionization from radioactive sources depends on the soil and geological structure as well as the meteorological dispersal rate. This boundary layer ionization decreases rapidly with altitude, and becomes less than the cosmic ray contribution at 1 km altitude.

Other sources of near-surface ionization come from mists and aerosols from waterfalls and ocean waves, man made sprays, combustion processes, lightning, point discharge or corona discharge, and friction from dust, snow or volcanic ejections. If you want to measure ionization, consider these sources that will distort your measurement of the ions in the air. This can help explain why the ion detectors show different measurements near a city or a beach than in the mountains.

Troposphere layer ionization
The troposphere layer is more complicated. This is the layer where trace air gases exist in abundance. Clouds in the troposphere act as a sink for small ions and will alter the distribution of ions. Clouds can also create a large decrease in local conductivity of the atmosphere, thus changing the electric field that you try to measure on the ground. Some clouds are also able to move large masses of ions through convection currents within them.
As we increase in altitude to the stratosphere (up to 50km), we see the main source of ionization is from cosmic rays. This is the altitude where sunspots and solar flares can reduce the cosmic ray influence by as much as 50%. These solar effects can last for hours to days. The degree of cosmic ray influence also depends on the geomagnetic latitude. Researchers also found that within the lower part of the troposphere, mountain peaks play a role in current density. Because they are closer to the source of the charge, they tend to collect more of the current from the sky than a section of land at sea level.

Mesosphere ionization
The mesosphere (50-85 km) is where ultraviolet light ionizes nitric oxide during daylight hours. Oxygen is also photo ionized in smaller amounts, along with small amounts of solar X-ray ionization. When we look above 80 km altitude, we see free electrons can exist, where mostly nitrogen and oxygen ions exist below. These free electrons are highly mobile, and make this a very conductive layer.

As we look higher than 85 km, we find extreme ultraviolet radiation from the sun is ionizing nitrogen and oxygen. This is where we see the biggest influence of solar sunspots from the 11 year cycle and the 27 day rotation of the sun, and this is thought to be the most powerful source of charging the atmosphere around the earth. We find that auroral precipitation is responsible for large variations in ion and electron densities at higher latitudes.

Is this starting to sound like rocket science? This was just a brief overview of the basics of the atmospheric electric field. There are many other intricate mechanisms that complicate these processes. All these mechanisms should be considered when designing an electronic long range locator. For people who want to measure anomalies of the electric field in the air above buried metal, you cannot ignore the variations in electric field caused by the mechanisms of the sun and other space energies. The relative charge of the air will vary depending on the solar activity, the weather, dust and waves, the geology of the local ground, the time of day etc, etc. Remember, the metal ions found in the ground were measured in the parts per billion and less. Consider the signal to noise ratio of any instrument that must measure electric field anomalies in the air above this trace of metal ionization.

Why your Zahori didn't work so well
This may begin to explain why some locators will work with some limited success in one area, but not another. Or why it worked good last month, but not now. In order for an electric field anomaly locator to work acceptably, It must be able to compensate for the sources of extraneous influences on the electric field. These extraneous electric field influences are considered noise when they are not part of an anomaly caused by the electrochemical properties of the buried metal. Compensating can be accomplished in the form of checking the sources of noise and making manual adjustments, or by electronic filters and self-correcting circuitry that cancels the noise sources. In some cases it is not possible to electronically cancel or filter the noise. If you want to design a LRL that is not influenced by variations in the earth's electric field, then perhaps you will look to measuring some other phenomenon (or combination of phenomena) that is not primarily dependent on the strength and stability of the electric field of the earth.

Where to next?
Is there another way? Of course there is. We may want to take another look at the strange space energies that are charging the atmosphere. Perhaps there is something buried in the details of those mechanisms that we have overlooked, that will not be subject to the fluctuations of solar flares etc. We can also take a closer look at the nuclear emmissions that come from within the earth, and the coexistence of telluric earth current flows, and at the way the earth's magnetic field interacts with these as well as the chemical processes involved with the dissolution and ionization of the buried metal. But that's a whole 'nuther story for another time.

Best wishes,
J_P

HI JP,
all nice. Lot of work.
But all said me what's I already know and I can't see any suitable method / principle one can use to made an LRL.

Anomalies could be made by a huge number of variables... and also noise sources could be (probably) hundreds or thousands.

No way.

For me, only way to get LRL work is an active device (like a radar), can't be passive device cause noise is dominant e.g. detecting electrical anomalies.

Think that some really powerful and directive (and penetrating the soil...) emission have to reach object, then reflected signal or secondary effects must be detected.

Best regards,
Max

[mosha]

self-convincing

Hi mosha,
are you sure they work in Brazil ?
I have my dubts.

Self-convincing in the best case, fraud intentions in the worst case.

If that things work e.g. in Brazil, why they don't give a public demonstration (like the challenge) there in Brazil that these things really work ?
I mean TV, superparty trusted witness, USA guests etc etc

All the show !

I'm skeptic that anyone could demonstrate this stuff work even in that places.

Also I've read all e.g. Hung (also Esteban and others) stuff regarding bad work e.g. due to solar activity and humidity there in Brazil (and SA in general)... but then ? Even there things are not sure !
You never can say if you'll find anything !

So why you could say this stuff really work there ???

You can't.

Kind regards,
Max

at least I am still still in self-convincing stage , I will let you know when go up or down.

[Max]

at least I am still still in self-convincing stage , I will let you know when go up or down.

Hi mosha,
I understand. That's a good thing think positive and be optimist.
And costs nothing.

But you already bought one of these ?

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,
Is it possible that there are already people using passive electronic instruments to locate buried gold? Have you convinced yourself it can't happen only because you don't know the exact technique they use?

Suppose 100 years ago someone claimed they could locate people hiding in the distance in the middle of the night from over 100 feet, no matter how dark the night is, without turning on any lights or building a fire to illuminate the area. People would laugh at this claim. However, this is easily done by anyone with a night vision scope today, without the need for illumination other than existing starlight. The reason people did not believe it possible is because they did not know the technique.

If the disbelievers had studied the science applicable to the light spectrum and electronics to learn enough of the details, and they also used some imagination to build a new device that worked on principles that were not in use at the time, they could have developed the first crude long range starlight imaging methods.

Today we have the advantage of a large array of existing technology that is highly developed compared to what existed 100 years ago. If you wanted to experiment with low-light imaging, you will find you can buy photomultiplier arrays, compact power supplies, pre-ground lenses with motorized zoom features, etc without the need to invent each of these supporting components to make low-light long range detector.

Is it really impossible to use the power from the natural phenomena observable from the earth and it's atmosphere to locate buried treasure? I doubt you will know the answer until after someone doing it shows you how.

It is good to protect your money from frauds who want you to pay thousands of dollars for equipment they refuse to demonstrate working. This is where skepticism helps you to protect your interests. But if there is no investment of your money other than a little time and parts to experiment with, you have little to lose and potentially a lot to gain by searching for a method to locate treasures from a long distance.

Many technically inclined people are able to build complicated electronic devices when they are shown the schematics to build with. Some of the more advanced technicians can find ways to modify circuits to work better. But to build a new technology that has not been tried is beyond the ability of many of these electronic experts. It requires a little imagination combined with expert electronic construction to develop a new technology that works to measure low-level anomalies in physical properties that exist around buried metals.

Consider - in this case, there is nobody asking you to send thousands of dollars. The only request is to think of a technique and experiment to make a working locator. I can guarantee you can't do it if you first decide it can't be done. Same as 1500s explorers were not able to find the Americas until after watching Columbus, they became convinced it can be done and actually tried it.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,
Is it possible that there are already people using passive electronic instruments to locate buried gold? Have you convinced yourself it can't happen only because you don't know the exact technique they use?

Suppose 100 years ago someone claimed they could locate people hiding in the distance in the middle of the night from over 100 feet, no matter how dark the night is, without turning on any lights or building a fire to illuminate the area. People would laugh at this claim. However, this is easily done by anyone with a night vision scope today, without the need for illumination other than existing starlight. The reason people did not believe it possible is because they did not know the technique.

If the disbelievers had studied the science applicable to the light spectrum and electronics to learn enough of the details, and they also used some imagination to build a new device that worked on principles that were not in use at the time, they could have developed the first crude long range starlight imaging methods.

Today we have the advantage of a large array of existing technology that is highly developed compared to what existed 100 years ago. If you wanted to experiment with low-light imaging, you will find you can buy photomultiplier arrays, compact power supplies, pre-ground lenses with motorized zoom features, etc without the need to invent each of these supporting components to make low-light long range detector.

Is it really impossible to use the power from the natural phenomena observable from the earth and it's atmosphere to locate buried treasure? I doubt you will know the answer until after someone doing it shows you how.

It is good to protect your money from frauds who want you to pay thousands of dollars for equipment they refuse to demonstrate working. This is where skepticism helps you to protect your interests. But if there is no investment of your money other than a little time and parts to experiment with, you have little to lose and potentially a lot to gain by searching for a method to locate treasures from a long distance.

Many technically inclined people are able to build complicated electronic devices when they are shown the schematics to build with. Some of the more advanced technicians can find ways to modify circuits to work better. But to build a new technology that has not been tried is beyond the ability of many of these electronic experts. It requires a little imagination combined with expert electronic construction to develop a new technology that works to measure low-level anomalies in physical properties that exist around buried metals.

Consider - in this case, there is nobody asking you to send thousands of dollars. The only request is to think of a technique and experiment to make a working locator. I can guarantee you can't do it if you first decide it can't be done. Same as 1500s explorers were not able to find the Americas until after watching Columbus, they became convinced it can be done and actually tried it.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi,
what you said is right. Maybe exist a way to made LRL as passive locator, thus using some natural behaviour (a natural originated physical phenomenon). My real problem thinking at a way like this is cause of noise sources. But maybe is just my problem, maybe that phenomenon can be used cause is suitable avoiding also that problems.

Maybe just my previous experiences with some "anomaly detectors" (stuff for finding power lines and other things like that) told me wrong things cause I think at electrometers like detectors.

But phenomenon could be different. Right.
Just I can't see any suitable one, at now, for passive LRL.

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Max,

My real problem thinking at a way like this is cause of noise sources.
...But phenomenon could be different. Right.

The biggest problem to overcome with an electronic LRL is noise. We are looking to identify exrtremely small anomalies over a large area full of noise from outside physical sources. If there was no outside noise, we would still need to deal with the internal electronic noise when measuring such small signals. The internal noise is best dealt with by eliminating the noise sources from the input side of the amplifiers (resistor noise and coupling from other parts of the circuitry). Of course we would be using the lowest noise components available to start with. Even if the circuitry is optimized for low noise detection, we still have external sources to filter or cancel.

A passive electronic LRL does not need to be limited to the circuit designs we have seen like Zahori and similar. It is true the phenomenon could be different than measuring electric field anomalies. In fact there could be several phenomena involved in building a high-reliability LRL. Consider the night-vision example I explained earlier: There are some night vision scopes that convert ambient infrared to visible images by using lenses and infrared image sensors to detect patterns that cannot be seen with the eye. These scopes also use sophisticated electronics to amplify the and convert the invisible received signal to visible light levels and adjust the intensity for easy recognition. Another variant of this night vision scope transmits infrared over the field of view to illuminate the targets and make them more visible (non-passive design).

These concepts can be used in the development of a working LRL. We are not trying to detect the image of someone hiding in the dark, but we have more phenomena to work with than the night vision example. When designing a LRL to find long time buried metal, we are not limited to looking only at the electric field anomalies. There are also many other physical anomalies that come as a result of buried metal with trace amounts of ions in a column of soil above it. Here is a partial list of some of the phenomena that can be expected to show at least a faint anomaly:

• variation in the electric field of the air around soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in the atmospheric leakage of current through the air above soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in chemical activity and soil chemistry due to the presence of metal-eating microbes.
• variation in metal radionuclides emmitted above this soil with metal ions.
• Variation in telluric earth currents.
• variation in magnetic field lines, depending on surrounding soil conditions.
• variation in local radio signal patterns from natural and man-made sources.

These variations may be extremely small and hard to measure. We rely on the energy mostly from the sun and other space energies to ultimately supply the power that generates the dim signals that we might measure. Now what happens when we discover some phenomena that is not quite strong enough to give a measurable signal? By understanding the details of the energies that power these phenomena, we can construct equipment to energize the area artifically. We cannot expect to guess what to transmit and at what levels. It requires examining what caused these anomalies to appear. In some cases there have been exceptions where experimenters stumbled onto unexpected responses. These also work, but we have no clue to what is causing the accidental response and how to optimize it.

Can any of this really work? I can guarantee there are several approaches of passive long range detection in use today which pinpoint long time buried metal, and have been in use for over 2 decades with varying degrees of success depending on the approach and sophistication of the electronics. The answers come with education and knowledge of the process, not by deciding it can't be done because we haven't figured out how yet.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi Max,



The biggest problem to overcome with an electronic LRL is noise. We are looking to identify exrtremely small anomalies over a large area full of noise from outside physical sources. If there was no outside noise, we would still need to deal with the internal electronic noise when measuring such small signals. The internal noise is best dealt with by eliminating the noise sources from the input side of the amplifiers (resistor noise and coupling from other parts of the circuitry). Of course we would be using the lowest noise components available to start with. Even if the circuitry is optimized for low noise detection, we still have external sources to filter or cancel.

A passive electronic LRL does not need to be limited to the circuit designs we have seen like Zahori and similar. It is true the phenomenon could be different than measuring electric field anomalies. In fact there could be several phenomena involved in building a high-reliability LRL. Consider the night-vision example I explained earlier: There are some night vision scopes that convert ambient infrared to visible images by using lenses and infrared image sensors to detect patterns that cannot be seen with the eye. These scopes also use sophisticated electronics to amplify the and convert the invisible received signal to visible light levels and adjust the intensity for easy recognition. Another variant of this night vision scope transmits infrared over the field of view to illuminate the targets and make them more visible (non-passive design).

These concepts can be used in the development of a working LRL. We are not trying to detect the image of someone hiding in the dark, but we have more phenomena to work with than the night vision example. When designing a LRL to find long time buried metal, we are not limited to looking only at the electric field anomalies. There are also many other physical anomalies that come as a result of buried metal with trace amounts of ions in a column of soil above it. Here is a partial list of some of the phenomena that can be expected to show at least a faint anomaly:

• variation in the electric field of the air around soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in the atmospheric leakage of current through the air above soil with metal ions in it.
• variation in chemical activity and soil chemistry due to the presence of metal-eating microbes.
• variation in metal radionuclides emmitted above this soil with metal ions.
• Variation in telluric earth currents.
• variation in magnetic field lines, depending on surrounding soil conditions.
• variation in local radio signal patterns from natural and man-made sources.

These variations may be extremely small and hard to measure. We rely on the energy mostly from the sun and other space energies to ultimately supply the power that generates the dim signals that we might measure. Now what happens when we discover some phenomena that is not quite strong enough to give a measurable signal? By understanding the details of the energies that power these phenomena, we can construct equipment to energize the area artifically. We cannot expect to guess what to transmit and at what levels. It requires examining what caused these anomalies to appear. In some cases there have been exceptions where experimenters stumbled onto unexpected responses. These also work, but we have no clue to what is causing the accidental response and how to optimize it.

Can any of this really work? I can guarantee there are several approaches of passive long range detection in use today which pinpoint long time buried metal, and have been in use for over 2 decades with varying degrees of success depending on the approach and sophistication of the electronics. The answers come with education and knowledge of the process, not by deciding it can't be done because we haven't figured out how yet.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,
"I can guarantee there are several approaches of passive long range detection in use today which pinpoint long time buried metal, and have been in use for over 2 decades with varying degrees of success depending on the approach and sophistication of the electronics. "

Are you referring to commercial LRLs (past ones ?) or to prototypes-only-not-commercial devices ?

Can you make some examples of (supposed) working LRLs ?

I think that the real obstacle is finding a suitable phenomenon that could reveal at distance the presence of metallic objects buried... for a passive device.

Example: due to the shielding effect of soil, that's damn good e.g. at least for lower (lower in the hi-spectrum e.g. VHF or UHF) frequencies EM radiations (and lower energy) is almost impossible rely on some kind of EM interaction, from remote and in a passive way, that could reveal the target presence, when target is buried even at small depth (few inches).

Of course, other kind of phenomenon could take place and reveal just wanted interactions... but which ? Really hard to figure out a suitable one, reliable and useful for localization of the (supposed) target.

Think e.g. at bacteria... of course one could sniff e.g. for gases subproducts of their activity and find some information about the "proximity" of e.g. gold in the soil (not necessarly a treasure, of course) ...but then how to locate the hot spot... seems to me like sniffing e.g. a geiser... to try to figure out were the magna is. Not so good. You could figure out e.g. if gases and vapours have ions mixed in... but never locate the magma chamber that way.

Otherwise e.g. for magnetometers that you know reveal for real variations on the local Earth magnetic field... but for ferromagnetic targets only and big masses. But are almost useless in TH if you don't consider ship wrecks locating from boats... underwater TH. For sure unuseful to find e.g. gold.
I dubt that anyone could use e.g. Earth magnetic field variations due to a gold bar to locate the gold bar! No way.

Electric fields and variation in the atmospheric leakage currents are unreliable cause there are hundreds (or thousands) of variables involved... so few gold ions in soil can't give any extra gradient to detect here.

Metal radionuclides emmitted above this soil with metal ions and variation in telluric earth currents seems interesting but a kind of clear correlation must be found to make them useful in that research. (radionuclides can be there or not... due to geological soil composition and so method is unreliable)

Big task find one suitable principle.

Kind regards,
Max

[Dell Winders]

Very Good, JP. At last, after years of wasted time being bashed watching the Skeptic monkey can only do what monkey see Carl, do mentality, it's good to see an EE on this forum that employs rational thinking and excellent logic. Keep up the good works. Dell