[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Funfinder

Stop your cruel, offending and cynical mockery against me because you are - like WM6 - already defeated, too!

Defeated? By whom? What defeat are you talking about? I have been watching attentively as you attempted several approaches at LRL projects which all seem to be abandoned as soon as you think up a new approach. Not a single of your LRL projects appears to be completed to a point that you can say they are working or have been determined not to work. Now you start a new project with the idea that a ferrite with many windings is needed as the Italian experimenter used in his ULF/VLF experiments. Yet there is no evidence or discussion which says this approach has any use in locating specific metals at long range. Does this mean I am defeated? I don't get it

It appears from my perspective that nobody has been defeated. From what I see all that has happened is you began another approach that I suspect you will abandon in the next few weeks because the basis for your approach was not well thought out, and not likely to work.

Originally Posted by Funfinder

Or do you like to tell us the Alonso PD is pure fake like all your other "non working LRLs"???

If so, prove it to us why it cannot work if you can!

I have said nothing about whether I think the Alonso PD is fake or not. What makes you think I would like to begin saying it is fake now?

And what are all these other "non working LRLs" you are claiming I have? I own no LRLs at all. Do you have a clue what you are talking about?

Originally Posted by Funfinder

I'm feeling sorry with you J_Player that you are now already completly desillusionated and full of hate because of all those dirty, evil and cunning LRL-lies you've been going through so you need to find some "victims" for getting lost of your frustration but it's unfair disturbing my own researches and developments I have to do because most people here are not able giving out the really NEEDED information!

Lies? Can you type out a reference to any lie I have posted in the Geotech forums? I would like to see where it is.

The fact is I am the only person that told the truth about the basic circuit approach that is found in the Alonso ferrite detector.
If you examine the circuitry, you will see it is as I told you it is.

Originally Posted by Funfinder

I'm shure the right magnetic coils are very important but even if the ELF or ULF should be the "wrong way" it's a worthful learning-experience because like alot others I have to find out that hole LRL-sh*t from scratch, from the beginning!


And if guys like you don't stop their unproductive and cynical comments no longer I'l tell any of my own discoveries!

Everyone I know who is interested in experimenting with a new LRL circuit has had to build from scratch. The people who are serious about actually building something usually start with a single idea and build circuitry to function according to that idea in a manner that makes some kind of sense, even if the underlying principle doesn't seem like it will work. They stick to their strategy and make modifications to their circuitry until they have the best they can produce to accomplish detection of a certain kind of signal that they defined beforehand. When their circuitry is completed, they test their apparatus, and determine how well it works to find the treasure they are looking for. They observe to see if it works well enough or not well enough, so they can decide whether they want to scrap their project, or keep it in their collection of treasure hunting tools. In cases where they scrap their project, they usually begin a new project that is designed to detect some different aspect of what they think is detectable from metals at long range.

I have observed this pattern from a number of LRL builders over the years. But I have never seen anyone start with an idea, then abandon it before it was finished and start successive projects which are all abandoned before completion, and still hope to end up with some apparatus they could test to see if it works or not.

If you go back and read what I actually posted instead of presuming what you are claiming about my post, you will see there are no lies. But I asked some specific questions that apparently you don't want to answer.
For example: What kind of signal are you trying to detect. From what I can see, you have not defined this signal, yet you are designing circuit methods to detect the undefined signal!

Originally Posted by Funfinder

But don't disturb my/our scientific work and electronic-investigations!

Scientific work? Are you disturbed by being asked about the details of the signal you are trying to detect?

Your approach in this new project does not seem to be scientific to me. But maybe I am wrong in my observations of what it seems to me you are doing. Assuming I am all wrong about the "scientific-ness" of your work, can you tell me the scientific explanation of the gold signal you are attempting to detect, and what method your circuitry will use to demodulate the part of the signal that identifies gold, or silver as the metal which is detected from long range?

For the record, I don't believe discussing the signal processing methods is counter-productive. I believe people all over the world are anxious to know more details about your technique for treasure signals and how to correctly extract it.

Best wishes,
J_P