cameras see gold

[bigwater]

Well I don't know exactly what you mean by "aura", but gold does have 5 isotope decay properties that are easily measurable in the laboratory.

Due to the difficulty in punching in the latin characters for these properties, I'm defining my own abbreviations as I use a term so I don't have to keep typing them out.

195AU with an electron capture decay mode (EC) and a 186.1 day half life (HL) and a decay energy (DE) of .227 electron volts (EV).
196AU with two decay properties, an EC with a DE of 1.506 EV, and a Beta- (B-) DE of .686 EV, both with a 6.183 HL
198AU EC, 2.695 HL, B-, 1.372 EV
199AU EC, 3.169 HL ,B-, 0.453 EV
197AU is the only stable isotope in gold.

So if by "aura" you mean measurable emissions from the element, then it is by no means pretend. No more pretend than the isotopes emitted by radioactive material that can easily be detected by a geiger counter. As technology advances, there's no reason these gold isotope decays could not be detected as easily as uranium isotopes can be.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

big water excellent post.


Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Swr, I would like to see your 'proof' that gold does not emit a characteristic aura, or identifiable field. Will you please list the scientific sources that are readily accessible that prove this. Wiki P is not acceptable.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Carl-NC]

Well I don't know exactly what you mean by "aura", but gold does have 5 isotope decay properties that are easily measurable in the laboratory.

So if by "aura" you mean measurable emissions from the element, then it is by no means pretend. No more pretend than the isotopes emitted by radioactive material that can easily be detected by a geiger counter. As technology advances, there's no reason these gold isotope decays could not be detected as easily as uranium isotopes can be.

All of the radioisotopes of gold are man-made and have short half-lives. So we would never be looking for radioisotopes of gold, but rather non-isotopic gold, which would have zero decay emissions. Therefore, this is irrelevant.

 

[jeff of pa]

why is is ,
when somone dosn't believe something

They can't Just say so Once & Leave it Alone ?

Why do non-Believers get so Upset
that Somone who Does Believe... Does ?

I Don't believe in Spirits,
except in Whiskey, But I Don't argue with
those who Do believe,
Because I Have No Doubts I'm Right.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

good morning my friend Carl:" Agreed, but the fact that the decay CAN be measured and 'photographs' taken of the measurements is the critical factor here, I seriously doubt that anyone in here is suggesting that the camera will show a pretty picture of a gold bar as such.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Rando: you posted -->If this is so "possible" WHY ARE YOU NOT DOING IT?~~~~~~~~~

That was a rather silly post, as you well knew. Is cold fusion possible ? Most Scientists agree that it is and is inevitable. If so, why hasn't it replaced all of our present nuclear Plants, since it is theoretically fool proof and far cheaper?

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Carl-NC]

Agreed, but the fact that the decay CAN be measured and 'photographs' taken of the measurements is the critical factor here,

But it's not. It's not a factor at all in the discussion, because decay emissions simply don't exist with buried gold. We cannot say, "Since radioisotopes of gold have detectable emissions, photographable auras of non-radioisotopic gold might therefore be possible." That's a completely bogus argument.

Is cold fusion possible ? Most Scientists agree that it is and is inevitable.

Actually. most scientists agree that cold fusion is not possible. It is considered pathological science.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI Carl ; You posted->

because decay emissions simply don't exist with buried gold. That's a completely bogus argument
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Odd, but I don't remember suggesting that they were ??
**********************************************************

you also posted -->
most scientists agree that cold fusion is not possible
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Curious, since the Chinese are doing a form of just that. They are setting up cold nuclear power plants. They are impossible to go out of control or runaway, left alone they are self quenching. hmmmm

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Swr you are at your usual nothing. One of the basic proofs of science is to prove that something can't happen. Many times it is just as important, or even more so, than proving that it can happen.

So bring on the proof that gold doesn't have a signature that can be measured and photographed.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Carl-NC]

Odd, but I don't remember suggesting that they were ??

OK, maybe I misread... it appeared to me that isotope emissions were being proffered as an argument for the viability of photographable gold auras.

you also posted -->
most scientists agree that cold fusion is not possible
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Curious, since the Chinese are doing a form of just that. They are setting up cold nuclear power plants.

Hot fusion, not cold fusion.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Carl to a point I agree with you, however --->

. But now U.S. Navy scientists say they do have them. They claim to have verifiable, irrefutable proof cold fusion is real, despite critics who say it's simply impossible


Don Jose d eLa Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Swr, sigh k, one --- while they were working on nuclear energy to be used in an Atomic bomb, they also had a group working on it's possible effects world wise. They didn't know if it would start a world wide chain reaction or not.

In many projected plans, the consequences of it must be considered if it was successful. The classic Chicken or the Egg thingie.

Incidentally, I only have to prove some thing to my peers. It certainly doesn't require a Mensa intelligence to ask ---why? Prove it to me? or what ever, without contributing a single intelligent constructive remark otherwise. Most little children can do this, as do the low IQ's who apparently have very little imaginative or learned abilities.

I will always try to explain my train of thought to Carl.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Carl-NC]

Carl to a point I agree with you, however --->

To what point? The point that the Chinese are building hot fusion reactors, not cold fusion? You should agree with me completely!

The US Navy claim is a completely separate matter, and we may disagree on this one. So far, 100% of cold fusion claims have turned out to be incredibly bad lab work. We'll see if the USN bucks the trend. I wouldn't bet on it.

In any case, all of this is irrelevant to the concept of gold auras. I detect a hint of "science doesn't know everything," which is a really weak argument to base a belief on. Also, some people claim to be able to photograph gold auras. Right now, not in the future. Like cold fusion, every case I've ever seen is the result of incredibly bad lab work. In this case, incredibly bad photography.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Carl You posted -->

You should agree with me completely!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Why? you were 1/2 wrong also.

*********************************************************

You also posted -->The US Navy claim is a completely separate matter, and we may disagree on this one. So far, 100% of cold fusion claims have turned out to be incredibly bad lab work. We'll see if the USN bucks the trend. I wouldn't bet on it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This remains to be seen, it also qualifies 'all' technical work until finally put into practical usage. For example, it remains to be seen if You and White will actually produce a superior, or new type of detector, or merely refine and tune up the existing ones. We need new types of detection abilities, methods, not just peaking / tweaking the same old basic TR or pulse systems.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You also posted --> I detect a hint of "science doesn't know everything,"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Unfortunately, that is all too true, it certainly doesn't. . As for the statement -- " In this case, incredibly bad photography'. -- while that may be true, it in no way nullifies the basic premise. Cameras may be modified to photograph elements and other energies, that is what we are are working on now, just as you are working on new detectors.

Simply because you haven't perfected your instrument yet, certainly doesn't classify it a pseudo science, wishful thinking, or impossible.. We have devices that will sniff out odors, see through clothing, inspect inside of vehicle panels for contraband, and, of course, I need not mention the IR foot print on modified cameras do I ? after all, all are just different frequencies no?

To say that it can not, or never will happen, is rather err, ahhh, hmmm, oh well.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Swr: You posted -->

"ain't got nothing to validate what I say" seems to be right on target.
~~~~~~~~~~

absolutely a brilliant repartee', just about what I would expect from you.

Ho hum

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Carl-NC]

Why? you were 1/2 wrong also.

Eh? On the Chinese fusion reactors, I was completely right.

This remains to be seen, it also qualifies 'all' technical work until finally put into practical usage. For example, it remains to be seen if You and White will actually produce a superior, or new type of detector, or merely refine and tune up the existing ones. We need new types of detection abilities, methods, not just peaking / tweaking the same old basic TR or pulse systems.

True, but all of this still has zero to do with photographable gold auras.

As for the statement -- " In this case, incredibly bad photography'. -- while that may be true, it in no way nullifies the basic premise. Cameras may be modified to photograph elements and other energies, that is what we are are working on now...

OK, and I certainly support the exploration of new ideas. But being able to photograph "other energies" is a long-standing claim that just hasn't held up. Nor has the fundamental existence of gold auras, using any kind of instrumentation. No different than the claim of resonant signal lines.

Simply because you haven't perfected your instrument yet, certainly doesn't classify it a pseudo science, wishful thinking, or impossible..

Like I've said, I've yet to see anything working, at any level. The aura photography I've seen so far definitely falls into the "wishful thinking" category.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

good morning Carl: You posted -->On the Chinese fusion reactors, I was completely right.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On the other, 100% wrong. hmmmm
**********************************************************
You also posted--->True, but all of this still has zero to do with photographable gold auras
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Negative, all progress is interrelated. Known as the spin off science advancement, of which you are very aware of.
***********************************************************

You also posted -->But being able to photograph "other energies" is a long-standing claim that just hasn't held up.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Do I have to remind you of IR cameras again? They are photographing 'other energies'.
*********************************************************
You also posted -->I've yet to see anything working, at any level.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Welcome to the crowd! for example, There are soo many advancements in Med science, both physical and psychological, that I would love to be kept up with, but the fact that I haven't seen or read of them does not negate them. I haven't seen your prototype metal detector yet either ??

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

swr: sigh. You keep filling in my psychological profile on you. I only wish that I had had it for my Psychology class. sheesh

Don Jose de la Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Hi swr: You posted -->and expect not to be challenged
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Certainly, but in an intelligent manner, not just cut and paste something from wiki. which is very questionable and not neccessarily up to date. .

In that light, 'prove to me' that you are technically qualified to logically question this subject other then just resorting to childish cut and paste from someone else's far outdated data..

The past line of investigations hit a brick wall due to using past data. This is not taking advantage of a new age where new things and valid ideas are being proven exponentially, so fast that the net sources simply cannot keep up with the latest data.

Post 'Your' personal thoughts based upon your interpretation of the latest data, not text books many of which are outdated even before they are printed.

Don Jose de La Mancha