Post proof of working LRL

[Esteban]

That could be one more point to use metallic enclosure, so as long as position of enclosure is fixed batteries boards wires etc don´t matter any more, as they are inside .
About performances,any difference between wodd and metal?
Regards,
Fred.

Metal is better for to reject interference. Also my idea is to put batteries in metal sub-box, and cables of batteries shielded, seems extrange, but maybe interference also filtrates in long batteries lines. So, there are many considerations.

I built the EPE "Magnetic field detector" by Andy Flind. I change the common transformer by spiral coil and both pass electrolitic by ceramic for to stop the very low frequencies. Remember, the capacitors in inputs are the first filter. I put this in metal box, very different if you build in wood box. Metalic box is very better in this circuit.

Don't know why, you obtain strong signals in inland in X type of terrain, not causes by treasures, maybe teluric currents? Is rare, but occurs.

With some modifications this is a medium range MD. If you put many turns, for example, this is a spiral of 15 cm diameter, tends to catch since rifle cartridge. But if you build in toroid core 1.7 or 2 ohms and appropiate aluminium rectangular antenna, this filtrates much the bronze and comes silver, for example.

[Fred]

Robert,
I was referring to this :

Esteban, stop being smart ***! Papanic is not Me (RObert). I am not Papanic.As far as i know, Papanic is Ioannis Papanikolau from Cyprus,EE, RF. My college.Already met him couple times on seminars! I dont know his intereset about decision to post that schematic here and i dont give a **** about it. (etc...)

then:

yes i have and you and antreas dont!
i dont give you nothing!
this schema is not lrl, is something else!
antreas steal but not understand it! ha,ha,ha,ha!
you also not understand it ha,ha,ha,ha!
yeas i am robert, so what!

And don´t worry about what i believe .It is precisely because i am listening to everyone and asking myself where is the truth that i posted this question to you.I am not taking anyone word as truth ,but some are consistent in their claims and others not...

Look at the situation:Esteban says he has built a device that works.He is not telling how he made it or how it works.
You say it is BS. but you dont backup your afirmation either.So i have no reason to believe you,more than anyone else talking about LRL.
Without tecnhical backup it´s just words.
At the beginning i was much more skeptical about this kind of LRL.Then i have observed and learnt.What can i say? i am less skeptical....that´s all.

Fred.

[J_Player]

Originally posted by Esteban
Who is able to dictate these rules?
Originally posted by J_Player
Carl dictated the rules for the remote sensing forum.
Originally posted by Esteban
This is in the case a X person decide to win the prize. Also I'm not electronic LRL seller or dealer.

No, this is not rules for people looking to win the prize or manufacturers. These are rules for all people who want to use the remote sensing forum. You can read here... http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/s...ad.php?t=10529

The term "remote sensing" is used to describe scientifically viable methods of detecting geophysical anomalies from a distance. It is also used to describe the less scientific method of "long-range locating", which is engulfed in controversy.

This forum is for the open discussion of either method. Because LRL-oriented forums can quickly degrade into personal conflicts, this forum will be strictly controlled. Rules are still simple:

• You must be a registered user to post here. Guests may read.
• Be polite. Name calling will get you banned quickly.
• Be factual. If you make an extraordinary claim, be prepared to get challenged.

In general, try not to take differences of opinions personally.

Postings considered to be inflammatory can be reported to Admin by clicking the little red triangle icon at the top of each post. Please use this only when absolutely necessary... I would like to keep this forum as open as possible, and do not care to mediate every conversation.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

I built the EPE "Magnetic field detector" by Andy Flind. I change the common transformer by spiral coil and both pass electrolitic by ceramic for to stop the very low frequencies.

Yes i remember this project, they says it can detect a train several kilometers away.At first i thought it was because of iron mass, but i believe it is because of strong electric field.
You say you detect strong signals "inland", does it mean that you dont have those signals near water?
If i understand well, the problem is that you need a detector sensistive enought to be "long range" and detect small objects, but if you make it too sensitive it detects too much interference and become unusuable, and too dependant of geographical position....
So you try filters and narrowing frequency range just like in good receivers.

Regards,
Fred.

[Esteban]

No, this is not rules for people looking to win the prize or manufacturers. These are rules for all people who want to use the remote sensing forum. You can read here... http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/s...ad.php?t=10529
Best wishes,
J_P

I referring this

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Player
There are only two ways I know to prove a detector will find a target:
1. Watch someone use the detector to find targets and recover them.
2. Build an identical detector and see if it finds a target.

Best wishes,
J_P


The reference was regarding these possibilities, no general rules in Remote Sensing forum.

In reference the possibility # 1, I wacht, I find, I recover... So I fulfilled this part, other history is believe or not believe.

I respect general rules. I can do extraordinary claims, but I don't want the prize, for the moment, no.

Regards

Esteban

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by J_Player
There are only two ways I know to prove a detector will find a target:
1. Watch someone use the detector to find targets and recover them.
2. Build an identical detector and see if it finds a target.

Originally Posted by Esteban
The reference was regarding these possibilities, no general rules in Remote Sensing forum.

In reference the possibility # 1, I wacht, I find, I recover... So I fulfilled this part, other history is believe or not believe.

Yes, you fulfilled method 1 only for yourself and people who were at the location in 1981. Nobody else in this forum can take a ride in a time machine to see what you saw. We can only read posts made here. This leaves us with method 2 to prove the LRL works. But we have no proof from method 2 because nobody is capable of posting a complete schematic with instructions to build an identical detector.

There are many people who believe things they saw. Let's take an example: A small child believes Santa clause rides in a flying sled with reindeers, and climbs down the chimney to bring presents at Christmas time. He has seen the proof when he finds presents in the morning after Santa came. Also, the people he trusts, tell him it happened that way.

If we are to believe this child is correct and Santa really does fly in a sled with reindeers, then we will be stupid for not testing to make a copy of this flying sled and go flying just the same as the child tells us Santa does. The child is not lying to us, he really believes all this is true. But he has not provided proof, only some anecdotal stories that cannot be verified.

This is why I showed a method to submit proof without relying on anecdotal storiies. You choose not to give instructions so we can verify the findings you report. There is another way to prove it works without using the forum. Come and demonstrate it in front of people who know where there is long time buried targets. There are many of these places near where the treasure hunters live in the USA. We have the technology to properly document this today. You can also win the Randi proze for $1 million before returning home.

If you choose not to provide any proof that your detectors work, then people will think you are the same as the child who believes Santa flies in a sled. They will not believe it works until they see it working in their own hands.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Esteban]

Yes, you fulfilled method 1 only for yourself and people who were at the location in 1981. Nobody else in this forum can take a ride in a time machine to see what you saw. We can only read posts made here. This leaves us with method 2 to prove the LRL works. But we have no proof from method 2 because nobody is capable of posting a complete schematic with instructions to build an identical detector.

There are many people who believe things they saw. Let's take an example: A small child believes Santa clause rides in a flying sled with reindeers, and climbs down the chimney to bring presents at Christmas time. He has seen the proof when he finds presents in the morning after Santa came. Also, the people he trusts, tell him it happened that way.

If we are to believe this child is correct and Santa really does fly in a sled with reindeers, then we will be stupid for not testing to make a copy of this flying sled and go flying just the same as the child tells us Santa does. The child is not lying to us, he really believes all this is true. But he has not provided proof, only some anecdotal stories that cannot be verified.

This is why I showed a method to submit proof without relying on anecdotal storiies. You choose not to give instructions so we can verify the findings you report. There is another way to prove it works without using the forum. Come and demonstrate it in front of people who know where there is long time buried targets. There are many of these places near where the treasure hunters live in the USA. We have the technology to properly document this today. You can also win the Randi proze for $1 million before returning home.

If you choose not to provide any proof that your detectors work, then people will think you are the same as the child who believes Santa flies in a sled. They will not want to believe it works until they see it working in their own hands.

Best wishes,
J_P

Ho, ho, ho!!! J_P, yes, you're right. Except the photographic evidence I collect, you can check the negative films for specialist for to comprobe isn't a trick... But, maybe I can post a design called "Treasure sensor", for objects medium and big size, in the "other" forum.

Regards

Esteban

[Esteban]

Yes i remember this project, they says it can detect a train several kilometers away.At first i thought it was because of iron mass, but i believe it is because of strong electric field.
You say you detect strong signals "inland", does it mean that you dont have those signals near water?
If i understand well, the problem is that you need a detector sensistive enought to be "long range" and detect small objects, but if you make it too sensitive it detects too much interference and become unusuable, and too dependant of geographical position....
So you try filters and narrowing frequency range just like in good receivers.

Regards,
Fred.

Just because is very sensitive to magnetic interferences, you can't use iron transformer, so if you modificate properly, is another history. Don't know what causes the strong signals in very apparted terrain, very apparted of electrical lines, industries, airports, buildings, etc.

[J_Player]

Ho, ho, ho!!! J_P, yes, you're right. Except the photographic evidence I collect, you can check the negative films for specialist for to comprobe isn't a trick... But, maybe I can post a design called "Treasure sensor", for objects medium and big size, in the "other" forum.

OF course the photos show authentic treasures. But they don't prove these treasures were found with the pistol detector. They only show pictures of people with detectors in hand and treasures in hand. I can make similar photos without using any long range treasure machines. Maybe I can make a photo to show a coin in hand, and Robertoro detector in other hand, but Minelabs GPX-4000 metal detector is not shown in photo. Photo does not prove the performance of a metal detector. It only proves that somebody took a picture of the things we see in the image.

If you post a design called "Treasure sensor" that will find treasure farther than a metal detector, then people will be more likely to believe what you say is true and can be verified in their own hands.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Esteban]

OF course the photos show authentic treasures. But they don't prove these treasures were found with the pistol detector. They only show pictures of people with detectors in hand and treasures in hand. I can make similar photos without using any long range treasure machines. Maybe I can make a photo to show a coin in hand, and Robertoro detector in other hand, but Minelabs GPX-4000 metal detector is not shown in photo. Photo does not prove the performance of a metal detector. It only proves that somebody took a picture of the things we see in the image.

If you post a design called "Treasure sensor" that will find treasure farther than a metal detector, then people will be more likely to believe what you say is true and can be verified in their own hands.

Best wishes,
J_P

So, if more people build similar to the "Treasure sensor" and found items, post the pics, etc., automatically will be true...

Also I use and build regular detector for to contrast the detection and for to find the item in the revolved sand. This is not indicative that the medium or long range detector doesn't work. One of the important utility of this kind of detector is: show you the places where items is obstaculized by vegetation, so you "clean" the area for to find the target.

[Fred]

So, if more people build similar to the "Treasure sensor" and found items, post the pics, etc., automatically will be true...

No! they will be suspected and made many questions to see if it is truth.But if a few says the same,some will begin to believe.This is exactly what happened with Morgan.
regards,
Fred.

[J_Player]

So, if more people build similar to the "Treasure sensor" and found items, post the pics, etc., automatically will be true...

If people who read the forum today can build a treasure sensor that will find targets at a greater distance than a metal detector (coin at 2 meters), then they will believe. The real proof is if anyone can build a detector according to the plans and find treasure at a greater distance than a metal detector. If all people who build this detector have success, then this is proof that it works to find treasure at long range.

No! they will be suspected and made many questions to see if it is truth.But if a few says the same,some will begin to believe.This is exactly what happened with Morgan.

In Morgan's case, nobody built a copy because the details of the coils are not known. So there is no proof from a working detector in our hands.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

In Morgan's case, nobody built a copy because the details of the coils are not known. So there is no proof from a working detector in our hands.

Yes, but one more person said it work,so more people tend to believe...
Fred.

[J_Player]

Yes, but one more person said it work,so more people tend to believe...
Fred.

Some people tend to believe and some people tend to not believe. The fact is there is no proof that we can see in our hands to verify if it is true or not. We must believe the same as the small child believes Santa clause flies in a sled because more than one person tells us it is true.

Best wishes,
J_P

[putrechigi]

hi at hall

OF course the photos show authentic treasures. But they don't prove these treasures were found with the pistol detector. They only show pictures of people with detectors in hand and treasures in hand. I can make similar photos without using any long range treasure machines. Maybe I can make a photo to show a coin in hand, and Robertoro detector in other hand, but Minelabs GPX-4000 metal detector is not shown in photo. Photo does not prove the performance of a metal detector. It only proves that somebody took a picture of the things we see in the image.

If you post a design called "Treasure sensor" that will find treasure farther than a metal detector, then people will be more likely to believe what you say is true and can be verified in their own hands.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hello to everyone ESTEBAN, J.PLAYER ecc... I thought something like this for the prove

http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZhUNbF9RY