dr. Best Ultimate Single Chip Two Antennas LRL

[Theseus]

I'm not very triumphalist like you!

I believe, if I am a triumphalist, as you say; it is only because I have a complete understanding of the topic which we are speaking - based on a very long and arduous collection of all the available data.

That is not to say I am not willing to change my mind in light of new data; ...only that at this time, there is no new data forthcoming.

Provide me with some valid new data...........

[J_Player]

I believe, if I am a triumphalist, as you say; it is only because I have a complete understanding of the topic which we are speaking - based on a very long and arduous collection of all the available data.

That is not to say I am not willing to change my mind in light of new data; ...only that at this time, there is no new data forthcoming.

Provide me with some valid new data...........

No data forthcoming?
Hmmm... Are we talking about another secret technology following the road to oblivion?

Maybe somebody else with the same idea will publish some successful experiments with improvements that make the project usable with repeatable test results. Could that save it from oblivion? Of course anyone who did that would receive the merit for his efforts.

Best wishes
J_P

[Max]

I believe, if I am a triumphalist, as you say; it is only because I have a complete understanding of the topic which we are speaking - based on a very long and arduous collection of all the available data.

That is not to say I am not willing to change my mind in light of new data; ...only that at this time, there is no new data forthcoming.

Provide me with some valid new data...........

Data from him ???

It's like squeeze water from a stone...

Nothing from him... apart PaloAlto statistics...

[Theseus]

No data forthcoming?
Hmmm... Are we talking about another secret technology following the road to oblivion?

Maybe somebody else with the same idea will publish some successful experiments with improvements that make the project usable with repeatable test results. Could that save it from oblivion? Of course anyone who did that would receive the merit for his efforts.

Best wishes
J_P

I expect to some, the mere "belief" they are holding back some grandiose technology concept, rather than making it available to the entire scientific community to test and evaluate - is satisfaction enough for them. Could be sort of an ego trip for them.

Or.... alternatively, maybe they are afraid to have the scientific community look at, test and pass judgment on their theory/concept because they already know in their heart what the outcome of that examination would be. Might not be favorable, and then what would they have to look forward to each day of the rest of their life? (rhetorical)

Thus, it is far less risky (to the human psyche), and considerably more pleasant, to simply never expose the total fundamentals of ones "secret concept/phenomenon", and consequently never risk the examination and resultant conclusions from actual peer review. A far safer path to follow and one that allows them to mess with and modify their "beepers" for the rest of their born days; all the while shielding themselves from the horrible truth.

[J_Player]

I expect to some, the mere "belief" they are holding back some grandiose technology concept, rather than making it available to the entire scientific community to test and evaluate - is satisfaction enough for them. Could be sort of an ego trip for them.

Or.... alternatively, maybe they are afraid to have the scientific community look at, test and pass judgment on their theory/concept because they already know in their heart what the outcome of that examination would be. Might not be favorable, and then what would they have to look forward to each day of the rest of their life? (rhetorical)

Thus, it is far less risky (to the human psyche), and considerably more pleasant, to simply never expose the total fundamentals of ones "secret concept/phenomenon", and consequently never risk the examination and resultant conclusions from actual peer review. A far safer path to follow and one that allows them to mess with and modify their "beepers" for the rest of their born days; all the while shielding themselves from the horrible truth.

Actual peer review?
In this case, wouldn't "peer review" be review from other treasure hunters who tested the Mineoro LRLs in the field?
I suppose they could look in the Geotech forum to read some actual peer review.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Esteban]

Hi Esteban,
I think the example you show is not a good example of the hobbyist experimenter you started with.

General Electric was also interested in his flat cathode ray tube, but Aiken declined their offer, telling them he had chosen the Kaiser group to fund his project. While developing his tube at Kaiser group, he found the Naval Research Center was interested in his flat tube for heads-up displays in jet planes. So they demonstrated a prototype and the government was interested. But when they told the government they must pay millions of dollars to develop production models and set up a plant and get into production, the government was not interested. They were only interested if the product could be implemented at a competitive price compared to other available heads-up display methods which came into use at the time. Kaiser then went to RCA and offered their flat tube to be used in the new RCA color technology. This is the story that we see in the article you posted. Their final decision was as you read -- they were too heavily invested in their own tubes to decide to accept his offer. But the story did not end there. Kaiser also went to other TV tube manufacturers who also did not want to sign a license for these flat tubes either. Not after his visit to RCA. When they found that nobody was interested in paying them to produce or license their flat tube design, Kaiser stopped funding the project. Too bad Aiken didn't choose the offer by GE. They weren't heavily invested in new dot matrix tubes like RCA, and they also had the capacity to fund production costs without problems from stockholders. Who knows?

But lets take a look at the patents Aiken filed. He was not the only person who had patents for flat cathode ray tubes. In fact he was not the discoverer of the concept. Many thought of it before, and a few did enough experimenting to make workable methods. Dr. Dennis Gabor (inventor of 3D holograms) patented a similar tube about the same time in London. And if you check your old copies of "Radio and Hobbies" magazine you will see there were new flat screen ideas published every couple of years from the 1940s. Also note a more affordable version of these flat screen cathode ray tubes were put into production for a few years in miniature hand-held TVs, but became extinct when plasma and LCD flat screens were developed. William Aiken was not involved in the development of these flat panel screens, only the flat cathode ray tube.

Also note his story is no way similar to the Alonso story or average hobbyist story. Aiken was not a hobbyist, but an engineer working for the government when he first got his idea. And he tried to sell it to people who did not want it under his terms or cost proposals (remember I told you experiment must do something useful that other people want done). But I don't see someone else receiving the merit for Aiken's discovery. I see nobody wanted to buy his discovery. Merit was not taken from him by some physics doctor as you claim. Aiken is still listed as the inventor of the first flat screen cathode ray TV. See here: Google "william ross aiken" http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

But I do understand the concept that an inexperienced businessman can make bad choices in how to market his idea.


To finish the flat screen idea, do you think Alonso will be putting flat screens on the Mineoro FG detectors to show GPS maps with an "X" to mark the location of treasure?
This is one I would like to see.

Best wishes,
J_P

I think is a problem of money... big industry of "fat" tubes. Imagine this guy, good engineer, scientific... experimenter/hobbyist... has less possibility. But Alonso is not hobbyist. I remember that in end of 70s he told that is possible (he assure he is capable of it) process and see a buried coin, for example, in a screen like size oscilloscope tube. So, pistol "can show" targets via screen. He has this tube waiting it... But jobs, responsabilities consumes much time... I'll ask about it... if I remember.

For example, he construct normal MD wich can detect a Spanish silver Carolus IV (the piece of eight) at 60 cm depth, discriminative, no PI. But he use strong transmitter. No, he isn't simple hobbyist like me... And he have a sciebtific mind, he analize very depth the things, and in this field is in extreme intelligent..., even prejudices toward South America by some guys... He make "million" coils for different purposes and experiments and work alone... If you know his capability for the work and intelligence... you don't believe, even today at 64. He told me, and I believe it: "I'm sure I'm the man in the world who winding and try the most quantity of coils". His hand-made coils have not comparisson with all the coils I have seen here on forum (hand-made). He made complete cinema projector by hand, pieces, screws, etc. with machinery. I remember that he has patented one of the smallest 35 mm cinema projector on the world... and he make millions things nobody imagine... He repair his car alone... etc.

[Esteban]

I believe, if I am a triumphalist, as you say; it is only because I have a complete understanding of the topic which we are speaking - based on a very long and arduous collection of all the available data.

That is not to say I am not willing to change my mind in light of new data; ...only that at this time, there is no new data forthcoming.

Provide me with some valid new data...........

Also I have collection of useful data in the field I work... Pistol is based on magnetic-electric-radioelectric theory, no mistery here. Of course is not valid our datas...: you justify me, so is not useful that present schematics, etc.

[Esteban]

I expect to some, the mere "belief" they are holding back some grandiose technology concept, rather than making it available to the entire scientific community to test and evaluate - is satisfaction enough for them. Could be sort of an ego trip for them.

Or.... alternatively, maybe they are afraid to have the scientific community look at, test and pass judgment on their theory/concept because they already know in their heart what the outcome of that examination would be. Might not be favorable, and then what would they have to look forward to each day of the rest of their life? (rhetorical)

Thus, it is far less risky (to the human psyche), and considerably more pleasant, to simply never expose the total fundamentals of ones "secret concept/phenomenon", and consequently never risk the examination and resultant conclusions from actual peer review. A far safer path to follow and one that allows them to mess with and modify their "beepers" for the rest of their born days; all the while shielding themselves from the horrible truth.

Do you see? But the phenomenon is waiting you! Is not in front of your computer or labo. I don't imagine scientifics walking with gadgets trying to "catch" the phenomenon, is not his style, maybe for you is like a "ghost", so explain since my poor scientific perspective is to expend time... for you and for me. The horrible truth is other...

[Theseus]

Also I have collection of useful data in the field I work... Pistol is based on magnetic-electric-radioelectric theory, no mistery here. Of course is not valid our datas...: you justify me, so is not useful that present schematics, etc.

Sorry.... I don't understand exactly the point you are making. Will reserve comment until maybe some further clarification.

[Fred]

I think the flat tube example is not so good.The tube was really complex,with many plates and tecnhical dificulties.
Probably expensive to build and dificult to use.

[Theseus]

Do you see? But the phenomenon is waiting you! Is not in front of your computer or labo. I don't imagine scientifics walking with gadgets trying to "catch" the phenomenon, is not his style, maybe for you is like a "ghost", so explain since my poor scientific perspective is to expend time... for you and for me. The horrible truth is other...

Sorry, no I don't see.

The phenomenon you are talking about is not waiting for me to either see or discover it. It is not a tangible as far as I am concerned.

If you, or others, desire for your phenomenon to be recognized by more than just yourselves, it will require that it be observable by not only myself but also disinterested third-parties. I don't think that is in the offing.

[Esteban]

Sorry.... I don't understand exactly the point you are making. Will reserve comment until maybe some further clarification.

You have your data, and also I have data regarding electronic LRLs and MDs. If you assume that all I have been posted since my own experience (and words) of years in this field is not valid, you justify me why I don't wish to present schematic(s).

[J_Player]

I think the flat tube example is not so good.The tube was really complex,with many plates and tecnhical dificulties.
Probably expensive to build and dificult to use.

One problem is for the military, they wanted some large screens with curves like a jet plane canopy, so the tube will be the canopy of the plane. Two problems: 1. The structural strength needed is very large because of the vacuum inside two curved plates of glass that are the size of a canopy. Also both plates must be transparent for the pilot to see through, and at the same time must carry high voltage - maybe 20 KV between the plates to deliver the beam.

2. A glass vacuum tube can be dangerous when it receives impact that causes it to break in a jet plane canopy. Maybe better to use safety glass or acrylic for canopy material, and a separate small flat glass heads up display.

When using for home TV, these problems of planes are not important. The problem for domestic use is the development was not done, and the production factories were not done. It costs a lot of money to complete these. Maybe that would have been a good idea to licence to GE who had the facilities for this. But even if GE completed the development and sold them for home use, then not too long later it would be obsolete as the plasma and LCD flat panels were developed. So large expense for few years of flat CRTs.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Esteban]

Sorry, no I don't see.

The phenomenon you are talking about is not waiting for me to either see or discover it. It is not a tangible as far as I am concerned.

If you, or others, desire for your phenomenon to be recognized by more than just yourselves, it will require that it be observable by not only myself but also disinterested third-parties. I don't think that is in the offing.

Observable, don't know... but measurable (detectable) with coils or antenna yes... the "phenomenon" is distortion of magnetic fields associated with chemical process, corrossion, particles migration, etc., that forms also an electric field (deppend of the size), also capable for to detect via RF.

[J_Player]

Observable, don't know... but measurable (detectable) with coils or antenna yes... the "phenomenon" is distortion of magnetic fields associated with chemical process, corrossion, particles migration, etc., that forms also an electric field (deppend of the size), also capable for to detect via RF.

The "phenomenon" is not from a column of ions that is 7.2 feet in the air holding its position above the buried metal?

J_P