discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrLs

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

JP,

One 4 MHz photon is indistinguishable from another. There is no way to tell what gave rise to the existence of that photon other than tracing it back to its origin. Clearly, the equipment in question is not able to do that.

At best, the equipment can be tuned to 4 MHz and make an occasional beeping sound, but you can't attribute the beep as being the result of
a distant gold ion having captured an electron to become electrically neutral.

Impedance matching has no bearing on the attainable results I'm afraid.

Hi Rudy,
We are in agreement that the photons are indistinguishable. One way we could tell what gave rise to the existence of some photons is if we saw some rapidly ionizing material in front of us which showed an increase in the frequency we were looking for when we moved close enough to it to detect. And then watched the signal decrease when we move away. However this won't happen when treasure hunting because the treasure is buried in a location we don't know.

But the problem still is how to detect it with the equipment at hand. This circuit does not look like it is capable of tuning a 4 MHz tiny signal from a distant ion neutralizing. If we adjusted a few components to set the tuning for 4 Mhz then I still can't imagine receiving a signal from a collection of distant ions neutralizing, no matter what source they came from.
Am I wrong about this loop antenna connected as it is?
Is it possible for this circuit to be tuned to receive the signal from a source of 4 MHz ions neutralizing in the distance without being flooded with much louder noise from other sources?

Best wishes,
J_P

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rudy---

Never be afraid.

As for impedance matching, anything and everything wrong with the thing has a bearing on it not working.

But I was obviously referring to other devices, which have antennas.

 

[Rudy(CA)]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Before getting to the circuit details JP, I feel we ought to further explore and firm up the "physics" behind these ions.

I think we can agree that the device could not directly detect a gold ion as the ions would not be floating in air and certainly not at a distance
that would qualify the device as an LRL. Therefore, if anything, what it would have to detect (with some kind of directionality) is some kind
of electromagnetic wave that is characteristic of the desired metal (e.g. gold).

_________________________________
An aside on your allusion to a carbon arc lamp:
Unless the machine is supposed to work only during a thunderstorm, where does the energy needed to create the plasma come from?
Carbon arc lamp like energies are not common events outside of such storms. Besides, the ions created by such an event would have
relatively short life times before becoming neutral again. So, if you wait for the thunderstorm to pass by, by the time you get there all
the ions would be gone.
_________________________________

Now, if we go micro scale, the shedding or replacing of an electron in a gold atom. The energy required or given up in the process is the Work function and for gold it is 5 eV or about 8X10^-19 Joules of energy.

Using the well known formula E= hc/λ and solving for λ we get λ=hc/E which gives us a photon wavelength of 0.248 µm. The frequency
is, of course, the reciprocal of the wavelength and it is around 4 MHz. This is nowhere in the pico/femto/atto range claimed. Of course, it is not necessarily a steady stream of photons since only one photon is emitted (or absorbed) for each atom's transition. A transition in one direction emits a photon while a transition in the other direction absorbs it.

It is however in the frequency range of the schematic presented.

Hi Rudy,
Yes, I verified work function the for gold in the CRC handbook, which is listed at 5.1 to 5.47 electron volts depending on the lattice structure. And this does indeed result in a range of 4 MHz, which is in the frequency range of that circuit. So the speed of common signal transistors is no longer a problem when we consider a real wavelength that we can count on when a gold ion neutralizes.

But now I have another problem. This is claimed to be a classifying circuit which is calibrated to detect only gold. The problem is the frequency that results from a gold ion neutralizing is in the same exact range as for carbon, platinum, palladium, nickel, iridium, and cobalt. This means if it is resoponding to the frequency you derived from the energy used to neutralize a gold ion, it would find any one of those elements as well as gold. I wouldn't mind finding most of these things by accident, except for carbon. I have a suspicion that carbon ions are WAY more plentiful than gold ions, and they use an identical amount of energy to neutralize or ionize, resulting in an identical frequency. It could mean digging up hundreds of pounds of plant roots, burrowing rodents, bugs, decaying wood, coal, Hmmmm.... Ok so if I found a coal mine or oil well maybe that would work for me.

But that's not the only problem. The other problem is I don't see anything in the circuit that could identify a 4 mhz frequency related to this neutralizing of a gold ion. (or carbon ion, etc.) Unless we consider it is a static detector which has some working mechanism to identify the λ of gold ionizing (ion chamber?).
Let's take a look at what they claim about the ion chamber...
"We needed to produce the phenomenon of "micro crash" "nano crash" or below... It was invented not just as a classifier - "filter", but as a generator of positive "ions", receiver of negative ions, in order to [cause] a short-circuit to occur, and generator of electrostatic".
Ok, they are claiming ions are generated inside this cylinder which has a +5v 10 Hz pulse at the one end, and +27v steady DC at the pointed end, and a gold foil in the space about 5mm away from the point. It looks like the gold foil is positioned in voltage gradient at a point of +22.5 if we ignore the 5v pulsing at the other end.
is it possile for ions to form here?
Not in the manner that an ion generator works it cant. But what about working as an ion chamber?
This chamber looks suspiciously similar to some of the home made chambers on Charles Wentzel's page: http://www.techlib.com/science/ion.html#Even Simpler Version
I should point out there is a grounded metal foil wrapped around the Mineoro PVC pipe to complete the "tin can" geometry like we see in these photos.
A simpler version can be found here: http://dwarmstr.blogspot.com/2007/07/simple-ion-chamber-to-measure.html
On this page we see a tin can with a wire inside shows readable signals that will double from the 4.8mv null reading to 9.1mv when an alpha source is placed nearby. What is interesting is he gets this signal using a 36v supply with an air gap much larger than we see in the Mineoro chamber running at 27v. The gradient is obviously stronger in the Mineoro chamber, so we can expect it will perform ok as an ion chamber. It would seem there is some tiny quiescent state leakage signal which would become larger if something caused the air inside the chamber to become ionized.

So how is this ionization chamber related to distant gold ions neutralizing?
We read where Mineoro says "Through electrostatic, the "ions" walk long distances, as if along an invisible wire". It would be absurd to think that a gold ion in the distance could transport from it's location to inside the LRL and make an electronic signal in the circuit. So what kind of signal will come from the distant ion neutralizing? For a group of ions neutralizing, we are talking about an unbelievably small signal that cannot be detected even a millimeter away. But the Mineoro LRL is not a millimeter away, it is at long range distance. And the detecting equipment is an ion chamber which does not respond to ions neutralizing in the distance. An ion chamber responds to radiation creating ions inside the chamber, not to distant gold ions neutralizing. So how can the LRL detect a distant gold ion neutralizing?

The only answer remaining seems like a far stretch, but possibly there is some kind of radiation coming from the ground, or from the sky which passes through the area and sets off the ion chamber, and at the same time causes some ions where the treasure is to ionize. If this is happening, there is no transfer of signal from the treasure to the locator. But we do have an event where both the treasure and the ion chamber see an increase in ions at the same time. So in this scenario we could say the LRL is beeping when it is near a treasure. The problem is it will beep regardless which direction you point it, and it will beep even if the treasure is not there. so it will not be acting as a treasure locator, but as a radiation detector.

Then another corrolary scenario is when the radiation comes from the ground only near the treasure. (I got no idea why radiation would come from the source of the treasure, I am just supposing if it did). In this case the locator could act as a locator of the radiation if the geometry of sheilding influences on the ion chamber and the person holding the detector made the chamber more receptive to the radiation when pointed toward the treasure and radiation source.

A final problem with either of these radiation scenarios is how can this tiny ion chamber signal enter the circuit above it, considering the impedance of the transistor network it is trying to feed? The hobbyist said his chamber was barely able to to turn on his darlington pair so he could measure a signal.

To summarize, I have three questions:
1. If this machine is detecting the energy of a gold ion neutralizing, how can it determine the difference from other elements that show the same energy when their ions neutralize?
2. What in the circuitry can identify a gold ion neutralizing?
3. How can the ionization chamber send any kind of tiny signal to the circuit above when the impedance is not even close to a match? (Or am I wrong about this)?


Best wishes,
J_P

Hi JP,

Ok, if you are with me on the calculation that a gold ion emits a 4 MHz photon when it falls to the lower energy neutral state. Then the first
question that comes to mind with the circuit schematic you enclosed is, why is the Big Loop antenna coupled to a resonant circuit that is tuned
to approximately 0.25 MHz (C3 dominates the capacitance as C8 is 100pF and the inductance is 380µH) when we are supposed to monitor for 4 MHz photons?

I can't make all the component values because of the quality of the schematic, but it looks like Q1 is an emitter follower with a low pass
filter in the emitter with a cutoff frequency of around 1.6 KHz. So, if we really wanted to detect 4 MHz photon, between the tank circuit at the antenna and the low pass filter on Q1's emitter, we've managed to attenuate the hell out of it.

Now here is the clever part (as in sneaky). Imagine a positive going signal is applied to the base of Q1. This makes the voltage at the emitter rise as well and also the signal at the base of Q4. The rising signal at Q4's base makes it conduct less, causing the voltage at the emitter to rise.
This rise is coupled back to the base of Q1 (through R4). Whoila! a positive feedback loop. Without SPICE and complete component values, I can't tell you quantitatively what happens, but qualitatively, it can cause the circuit to spontaneously produce beeps due to circuit or external
noise. Another feedback path exists, from the coil TR2 forming part of a resonant tank circuit with C5 & C6. Can't make out the values so I don't know what the resonant frequency of it is. But in this case, when Q4 conducts less, the voltage at the top of TR2 drops and this drop is applied back to the base of Q1, opposing the other feedback. Which one prevails, I can't tell.

But what I can tell you is it doesn't do anything with 4 MHz signals which the physics say is the signal to look for.

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Hi JP,

Ok, if you are with me on the calculation that a gold ion emits a 4 MHz photon when it falls to the lower energy neutral state. Then the first
question that comes to mind with the circuit schematic you enclosed is, why is the Big Loop antenna coupled to a resonant circuit that is tuned
to approximately 0.25 MHz (C3 dominates the capacitance as C8 is 100pF and the inductance is 380µH) when we are supposed to monitor for 4 MHz photons?

I can't make all the component values because of the quality of the schematic, but it looks like Q1 is an emitter follower with a low pass
filter in the emitter with a cutoff frequency of around 1.6 KHz. So, if we really wanted to detect 4 MHz photon, between the tank circuit at the antenna and the low pass filter on Q1's emitter, we've managed to attenuate the hell out of it.

Now here is the clever part (as in sneaky). Imagine a positive going signal is applied to the base of Q1. This makes the voltage at the emitter rise as well and also the signal at the base of Q4. The rising signal at Q4's base makes it conduct less, causing the voltage at the emitter to rise.
This rise is coupled back to the base of Q1 (through R4). Whoila! a positive feedback loop. Without SPICE and complete component values, I can't tell you quantitatively what happens, but qualitatively, it can cause the circuit to spontaneously produce beeps due to circuit or external
noise. Another feedback path exists, from the coil TR2 forming part of a resonant tank circuit with C5 & C6. Can't make out the values so I don't know what the resonant frequency of it is. But in this case, when Q4 conducts less, the voltage at the top of TR2 drops and this drop is applied back to the base of Q1, opposing the other feedback. Which one prevails, I can't tell.

But what I can tell you is it doesn't do anything with 4 MHz signals which the physics say is the signal to look for.

Hi Rudy,
I did some research and got values for most of the components. After seeing the component values, I have some more questions about that ion chamber. But, before we get back to the physics theory, maybe we should take another look at the circuit for what it can and can't do in the way of frequencies.

 

[Rudy(CA)]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Hi JP,

Ok, if you are with me on the calculation that a gold ion emits a 4 MHz photon when it falls to the lower energy neutral state. Then the first
question that comes to mind with the circuit schematic you enclosed is, why is the Big Loop antenna coupled to a resonant circuit that is tuned
to approximately 0.25 MHz (C3 dominates the capacitance as C8 is 100pF and the inductance is 380µH) when we are supposed to monitor for 4 MHz photons?

I can't make all the component values because of the quality of the schematic, but it looks like Q1 is an emitter follower with a low pass
filter in the emitter with a cutoff frequency of around 1.6 KHz. So, if we really wanted to detect 4 MHz photon, between the tank circuit at the antenna and the low pass filter on Q1's emitter, we've managed to attenuate the hell out of it.

Now here is the clever part (as in sneaky). Imagine a positive going signal is applied to the base of Q1. This makes the voltage at the emitter rise as well and also the signal at the base of Q4. The rising signal at Q4's base makes it conduct less, causing the voltage at the emitter to rise.
This rise is coupled back to the base of Q1 (through R4). Whoila! a positive feedback loop. Without SPICE and complete component values, I can't tell you quantitatively what happens, but qualitatively, it can cause the circuit to spontaneously produce beeps due to circuit or external
noise. Another feedback path exists, from the coil TR2 forming part of a resonant tank circuit with C5 & C6. Can't make out the values so I don't know what the resonant frequency of it is. But in this case, when Q4 conducts less, the voltage at the top of TR2 drops and this drop is applied back to the base of Q1, opposing the other feedback. Which one prevails, I can't tell.

But what I can tell you is it doesn't do anything with 4 MHz signals which the physics say is the signal to look for.

Hi Rudy,
I did some research and got values for most of the components. After seeing the component values, I have some more questions about that ion chamber. But, before we get back to the physics theory, maybe we should take another look at the circuit for what it can and can't do in the way of frequencies.

Well, the input coil is still tuned to 0.25MHz frequency. The RC on Q1's emitter forms a low pass with an upper frequency cutoff
of approximately 5 KHz.

Q4's collector has what looks like a Colpitts circuit ... tuned to around 47.6 KHz. So impulses from Q1 would cause the Colpitts
to oscillate at around 47.6 KHz and a small amount is fed back -in phase- to the Q1 base. Without SPICE I can't tell you how close to
the edge of spontaneous oscillations the whole thing is.

A portion of the Colpitts signal is fed to Q2 and amplified. The two capacitors and two diodes on the collector are a bit strange. The value
of C1 looks funny so I don't know how this network is supposed to behave.

From a high level, I think he is trying to charge up C16 by rectifying the signal on Q2's collector, but I don't see why two diodes are required and one of them (D2) may not be doing anything at all depending on the value of C1. If C1 = C14 then D2 is not doing anything.

The output of Q3 is AC coupled and divided down by the resistors network in front of the Atmel chip. So, the Atmel is looking for some AC voltage signal, but when does it know when to strobe?

I can't really see the "ion chamber" serving a useful function and the "small loop" network is not connected to the rest of the circuit.

JP, do you have the pin outs for that Atmel device? If so, what is Pin 16, an input or an output?

My impression is that this circuit is not doing much of anything other than to create some false signals triggered by external noise events.

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

So far, this discussion has included eyeballs, photons, ion chambers, and radio waves.

Here's a new twist, that actually seems pretty close to possible.

I saw an investigation type, true story, TV show that had a bloodhound looking for a kidnap victim. Instead of chasing the scent through the woods, the dog was hitting the scent while going down the street. This indicated that the person was taken away in a car.

Anyway, this bloodhound followed the scent to a highway, and down the highway, by sniffing the shoulder of the road, on past a few exits, then off the exit ramp, and down a street toward some woods. And that's where the person was found.

The question is, how tiny of a sample of whatever they smell, was available? The person wasn't even walking, but riding in a car, so they weren't even in contact with the ground! And the with the car moving at highway speed, how much of a sample could there have been going out the window or through the vents?

And of that sample, how much of it would settle on the shoulder, when it must have been dispersed over a wide area, especially at speed?

Since the dog could identify that particular scent, as different from all others, it must be dealing with some kind of complex molecular structure, because anything smaller would not be able to have enough of a difference from all other people.

Is this a possible detection system?

I guess it would depend on whether or not there is anything identifiable at the target location, which is different from it's environment.

One thing the dog scenario suggests is that it wouldn't take much of whatever it might be, to cause an indication in the right kind of sensor.

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Well, the input coil is still tuned to 0.25MHz frequency. The RC on Q1's emitter forms a low pass with an upper frequency cutoff
of approximately 5 KHz.

Q4's collector has what looks like a Colpitts circuit ... tuned to around 47.6 KHz. So impulses from Q1 would cause the Colpitts
to oscillate at around 47.6 KHz and a small amount is fed back -in phase- to the Q1 base. Without SPICE I can't tell you how close to
the edge of spontaneous oscillations the whole thing is.

A portion of the Colpitts signal is fed to Q2 and amplified. The two capacitors and two diodes on the collector are a bit strange. The value
of C1 looks funny so I don't know how this network is supposed to behave.

From a high level, I think he is trying to charge up C16 by rectifying the signal on Q2's collector, but I don't see why two diodes are required and one of them (D2) may not be doing anything at all depending on the value of C1. If C1 = C14 then D2 is not doing anything.

The output of Q3 is AC coupled and divided down by the resistors network in front of the Atmel chip. So, the Atmel is looking for some AC voltage signal, but when does it know when to strobe?

I can't really see the "ion chamber" serving a useful function and the "small loop" network is not connected to the rest of the circuit.

JP, do you have the pin outs for that Atmel device? If so, what is Pin 16, an input or an output?

My impression is that this circuit is not doing much of anything other than to create some false signals triggered by external noise events.

Hi Rudy,

The Atmel pins can be programmed to be input or output. 12 and 13 are configured as inputs which have comparators available if needed. 16 is unused, and 15 is an output which apparently sends a beep to the buzzer when treasure is detected.
Looking at the circut, I get the same .25 MHz loop (.26 Mhz actually). Starting from the 260 KHz single loop tuner, we can follow your analysis through the emittter follower feedback from Q4 after adjusting for sensitivity at R1. I got 59.4 KHz at the Colpitts oscillator, but I may have made an error to not reach your 47.6 KHz. Actually, 60 KHz is an important treasure hunting frequency for the designers who make Mineoro products. This is what they consider a frequency which is a good compromise between detecting noise and confusing aluminum for gold. Why? I got no idea. As near as I can tell they discovered this by trial and error for transmitted frequencies. (Note this frequency is not being transmitted).

Now let's step back a minute and take a look at this circuit. The TR2 resonant circuit gets it's power from the earlier loop antenna and emitter follower, and from C20 and whatever comes out of the ion chamber (probably nothing). This leaves the loop as the prime source for a signal. The 47.6 KHz signal is an internally developed signal, while the signal from the loop comes from outside the circuit, and the Ion chamber signal is also from outside the circuit. This means the 47.6 KHz signal is either a signal designed as an intermediate frequency for conditioning a specific kind of input signal, or a convieniently chosen oscillator frequency to make it easy to filter out some feature of the input signal in the next stage. Or maybe this oscillator has some other purpose?

After the signal from this oscillator is filtered, rectified, and passes Q3 it is then split to two different levels and sent to the processor for final processing. We can immediately suspect a comparator function, or possibly some other functions such as checking time intervals inside the processor before an output signal is sent to the buzzer. And we also note a 10 Hz square wave sent to the ion chamber which we expect to be fairly stable considering it is clocked by a crystal which happens cooincidentally be 4 MHz, the frequency of the gold ions we would hope to find.

Stepping back for another look at what we have, I see an ion chamber and a 260 HKz loop antenna for input unless some of the other conductors on the circuit board are supposed to pick up stray noise or signal in addition to these two "sensors". Then we have a question of what kind of signal coming from either of these two sources could set off the 47.6 Hhz oscillator to cause an unknown signal to travel all the way to the processor for final filtering/conditioning?

If there is nothing coming in at 260 KHz related to nearby gold or a man-made RF transmission, I would expect noise. Maybe broadband noise is getting through if the sensitivity of the circuit is high enough. And the ion chamber -- Why put a 10 Hz signal on the gold foil? Hopefully you or someone else familiar with circuits can add something to the circuit analysis that I can't see.

At first glance this entire circuit does not look like anything which could detect a treasure. But we see it is not the simple pile of parts from a junk box we find in some LRLs. It has some recognizable circuit fragments pieced together, which has always been a theme to the design of Mineoro circuitry. Their typical theme is to combine a VLF oscillator and a passive receiver with a bandpass filter, then extract some kind of signal using a technique which varies from model to model. And we also read their literature about gold ion and electrostatics theory, which we know is at least partly wrong. But since the circuit is designed to do something, I cannot call it do-nothing electronics. At least not yet, until we have an idea what it is doing and not doing.

What is interesting comes from observing the performance of Mineoro electronic LRLs from a database of users all over the world. We discover that the performance of the Mineoro electronic LRLs seems to deteriorate progressively as you read reports from people who use the Mineoro LRLs at a loctation farther away from the factory demonstration yard and from nearby friends of people who work at the factory. While we hear reports of wonderful treasure recoveries in Brazil and surrounding countries, these recoveries seem fewer as we move away from South America to North America, Europe, the mediterranean, the Middle East, Australia/New Zealand, -- until we have no reports of success at all coming from Asia and the northern pacific rim. If we look for the farthest land mass on earth from the Mineoro factory, we will find a small island off the coast of Japan. Japan is where we would expect to hear the fewest incidences of Mineoro success, based on statistics of where successful recoveries were reported by users in the forums.

A second item of interest is most users of Mineoro electronic LRLs report they don't work, and all they detect is static and random beeping. This kind of report seems pertinent to the circuit we are looking at above. It makes me wonder if it is picking up broadband noise, which can vary from location to location. The reports of successful recoveries becomes more plentiful as we approach the location of the Mineoro factory and friends of Mineoro factory workers. This raises another question: Is this anomaly in Mineoro success rates caused by a physical feature of the location? Or is it caused by local promotional efforts?


At this point, the Mineoro theory of LRL detection leaves three questions in my mind:
1. What are the missing answers to the questions I raised about this circuit above?
When we know these answers, could they point to a possible LRL theory that works?
2. What part, if any of thier ion detection theory could be used to actually detect something, even if only from a close range?
3. Why do we hear reports of Mineoro electronic LRLs working mostly from locations nearer to the factory?


Best wishes,
J_P

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

So far, this discussion has included eyeballs, photons, ion chambers, and radio waves.

Here's a new twist, that actually seems pretty close to possible.

I saw an investigation type, true story, TV show that had a bloodhound looking for a kidnap victim. Instead of chasing the scent through the woods, the dog was hitting the scent while going down the street. This indicated that the person was taken away in a car.

Anyway, this bloodhound followed the scent to a highway, and down the highway, by sniffing the shoulder of the road, on past a few exits, then off the exit ramp, and down a street toward some woods. And that's where the person was found.

The question is, how tiny of a sample of whatever they smell, was available? The person wasn't even walking, but riding in a car, so they weren't even in contact with the ground! And the with the car moving at highway speed, how much of a sample could there have been going out the window or through the vents?

And of that sample, how much of it would settle on the shoulder, when it must have been dispersed over a wide area, especially at speed?

Since the dog could identify that particular scent, as different from all others, it must be dealing with some kind of complex molecular structure, because anything smaller would not be able to have enough of a difference from all other people.

Is this a possible detection system?

I guess it would depend on whether or not there is anything identifiable at the target location, which is different from it's environment.

One thing the dog scenario suggests is that it wouldn't take much of whatever it might be, to cause an indication in the right kind of sensor.

Hi EE THr,

Yes, what you are talking about can work and it is already working as a technology. But nobody applied it to treasure hunting yet.
The electronic equipment is here, and is better than a dog can smell. The way it works is by identifying specific airborne molecules which are present in tiny trace amounts. It does this in a similar fashion to how a neuroreceptor works, with the key and keyhole analogy applied to specific molecules. You can read about the method here:
http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/v37_1_04/article_15.shtml
http://www.phschool.com/science/science_news/articles/bomb_cantilever.html
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/topstory/7937/7937notw6.html

As you can see Thomas Thundat's discoveries led him to developing a collection of microscopic electrochemical sensors that can detect not only explosives, but a large array of molecules that are very useful in medical diagnosis and other fields. Thomas Thundat's research is on the cutting edge of replicating an electronic version of sensors that are more sensitive than a dog's sense of smell. His sensors can fit in a plastic box the size of a pocket radio run by a 9v battery, and can be made to detect just about any kind of molecule which could become airborne. To sense a different molecule, a different chemically doped coating is deposited on the micro-cantilevers.
This invention was called the sniffex, (not to be confused with a dowsing rod bomb-detector also called sniffex, which failed double blind testing):



These sensors have been used for medical diagnosis, and for detecting explosives in trace amounts that a dog cannot smell. Since the technology is here, the question points to what molecules can be found in the air near where treasure is buried? If there are airborne molecules found only where we find buried gold, silver, diamonds, currencies, etc, then we have a workable solution. However, this solution would be dependent on things like the wind and possibly the weather.



Best wishes,
J_P

 

[Rudy(CA)]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

The Atmel pins can be programmed to be input or output. 12 and 13 are configured as inputs which have comparators available if needed. 16 is unused, and 15 is an output which apparently sends a beep to the buzzer when treasure is detected.

Thanks JP, I read it wrong. I really meant 15 and you've answered the question.

Looking at the circut, I get the same .25 MHz loop (.26 Mhz actually). Starting from the 260 KHz single loop tuner, we can follow your analysis through the emittter follower feedback from Q4 after adjusting for sensitivity at R1. I got 59.4 KHz at the Colpitts oscillator, but I may have made an error to not reach your 47.6 KHz.

Well, I was doing "back of the envelope" rough calculations so your numbers may be more accurate than mine.

Now let's step back a minute and take a look at this circuit. The TR2 resonant circuit gets it's power from the earlier loop antenna and emitter follower, and from C20 and whatever comes out of the ion chamber (probably nothing).

I dismissed the possibility of any meaningful amount of signal from the ion chamber via C20 because:
A. If there is a signal at all coming from the chamber, it would be extremely small.
B. The value of C7 is 33pF and the equivalent capacitance of C5 & C6 is on the order of 500pF, thus only about 7%
of the extremely small signal from the chamber would be impressed on the Colpitts.

After the signal from this oscillator is filtered, rectified, and passes Q3 it is then split to two different levels and sent to the processor for final processing. We can immediately suspect a comparator function, or possibly some other functions such as checking time intervals inside the processor before an output signal is sent to the buzzer. And we also note a 10 Hz square wave sent to the ion chamber which we expect to be fairly stable considering it is clocked by a crystal which happens cooincidentally be 4 MHz, the frequency of the gold ions we would hope to find.

Stepping back for another look at what we have, I see an ion chamber and a 260 HKz loop antenna for input unless some of the other conductors on the circuit board are supposed to pick up stray noise or signal in addition to these two "sensors". Then we have a question of what kind of signal coming from either of these two sources could set off the 47.6 Hhz oscillator to cause an unknown signal to travel all the way to the processor for final filtering/conditioning?

If there is nothing coming in at 260 KHz related to nearby gold or a man-made RF transmission, I would expect noise. Maybe broadband noise is getting through if the sensitivity of the circuit is high enough. And the ion chamber -- Why put a 10 Hz signal on the gold foil? Hopefully you or someone else familiar with circuits can add something to the circuit analysis that I can't see.

I don't know the purpose of applying 10 Hz to the chamber other than: Providing some speculative signals to anyone that attempts to look at the circuit with an oscilloscope. And, let's not forget that a small amount of that 5V 10Hz pulse train is going to capacitively couple to the rod end of the chamber and from there to the base of Q1 thus serving as an internal source of noise injection.

At first glance this entire circuit does not look like anything which could detect a treasure. But we see it is not the simple pile of parts from a junk box we find in some LRLs. It has some recognizable circuit fragments pieced together, which has always been a theme to the design of Mineoro circuitry. Their typical theme is to combine a VLF oscillator and a passive receiver with a bandpass filter, then extract some kind of signal using a technique which varies from model to model. And we also read their literature about gold ion and electrostatics theory, which we know is at least partly wrong. But since the circuit is designed to do something, I cannot call it do-nothing electronics. At least not yet, until we have an idea what it is doing and not doing.

As designed, the circuit will not detect photons of the frequency at which physics says it should happen.

What is interesting comes from observing the performance of Mineoro electronic LRLs from a database of users all over the world. We discover that the performance of the Mineoro electronic LRLs seems to deteriorate progressively as you read reports from people who use the Mineoro LRLs at a loctation farther away from the factory demonstration yard and from nearby friends of people who work at the factory. While we hear reports of wonderful treasure recoveries in Brazil and surrounding countries, these recoveries seem fewer as we move away from South America to North America, Europe, the mediterranean, the Middle East, Australia/New Zealand, -- until we have no reports of success at all coming from Asia and the northern pacific rim. If we look for the farthest land mass on earth from the Mineoro factory, we will find a small island off the coast of Japan. Japan is where we would expect to hear the fewest incidences of Mineoro success, based on statistics of where successful recoveries were reported by users in the forums.

A second item of interest is most users of Mineoro electronic LRLs report they don't work, and all they detect is static and random beeping. This kind of report seems pertinent to the circuit we are looking at above. It makes me wonder if it is picking up broadband noise, which can vary from location to location. The reports of successful recoveries becomes more plentiful as we approach the location of the Mineoro factory and friends of Mineoro factory workers. This raises another question: Is this anomaly in Mineoro success rates caused by a physical feature of the location? Or is it caused by local promotional efforts?


At this point, the Mineoro theory of LRL detection leaves three questions in my mind:
1. What are the missing answers to the questions I raised about this circuit above?
When we know these answers, could they point to a possible LRL theory that works?
2. What part, if any of thier ion detection theory could be used to actually detect something, even if only from a close range?
3. Why do we hear reports of Mineoro electronic LRLs working mostly from locations nearer to the factory?


Best wishes,
J_P

"Why do we hear reports of Mineoro electronic LRLs working mostly from locations nearer to the factory?" Hmm, possibly operated
and or managed by Mineoro factory personnel?

 

[TabWhisperer]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

I saw an investigation type, true story, TV show that had a bloodhound looking for a kidnap victim. Instead of chasing the scent through the woods, the dog was hitting the scent while going down the street. This indicated that the person was taken away in a car.

Anyway, this bloodhound followed the scent to a highway, and down the highway, by sniffing the shoulder of the road, on past a few exits, then off the exit ramp, and down a street toward some woods. And that's where the person was found.

This sounds like Alie Berrelez and Yogi. The hound tracked her scent over 10 miles to the point where he was exhausted and had to rest overnight. The dog rode in a car and walked along a highway following the same route Alie had taken while riding in her abuductors car. Just completely mind blowing. But a very sad ending.

http://www.alie.org/news1.html

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

jimbog---

That's the one. I've seen it twice on TV, the first time about a year ago.

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rudy & JP---

I wonder if the strange frequencies and loops could be used to pick up something generated by the demonstrators, to make it beep at the right time, and thus appear to be detecting something?

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rudy & JP---

I wonder if the strange frequencies and loops could be used to pick up something generated by the demonstrators, to make it beep at the right time, and thus appear to be detecting something?

Hi EE THr,

This is simple.
This LRL responds to broadband noise, as verified by shorting a 1.5 v battery, or tapping on your car brake lights to cause the Mineoro LRL to beep. You could use any kind of spark signal such as an automotive ignition coil and a spark plug, or a piezo-lighter to make a spark. But a better method would be to build a small 260 KHz transmitter that you keep in your pocket, which you could pulse on whenever you wanted the LRL to beep. I suppose you would need to keep one hand in your pocket to make this work.

The problem with this approach is it will not work for Carl's test to win his $25,000. Why else would you want to try a trick like that unless you were a manufacturer making a demonstration? Some people have advanced hypothetical theories that this exact mechanism could explain the answer to my question #3 above about more Mineoro successful recoveries being closer to the factory location.

A more important concept in long range detection is your sniffing example. There are treasure smells coming out of the ground... didn't you know?

Best wishes,
J_P

 

[hung]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Hey J__________P,
Your head is so much full of theories that who knows, maybe you have a good theory to solve that probability problem I posted in the 'Do the Math' thread.

You know, skeptics talk a lot of things but when it comes down to just DO IT, they fly. See you there.

 

[Rudy(CA)]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rudy & JP---

I wonder if the strange frequencies and loops could be used to pick up something generated by the demonstrators, to make it beep at the right time, and thus appear to be detecting something?

You mean they cheat?

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

SWR---

Yup. I had a job one time where they gave me a truck and a cell phone. I don't remember what brand or what service it used, but as I drove down the freeway, every ten or fifteen minutes, through the truck's radio, I could hear the cell phone sending packets to hook up with the next cell tower. It sounded kind of like an old rotary phone dialing. That would probably do it.


JP---

I've heard of the explosives "sniffer" devices, but had no idea how sensitive they were.


P.S. Does anyone know if the bloodhound has been patented? 8)

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Hey J__________P,
Your head is so much full of theories that who knows, maybe you have a good theory to solve that probability problem I posted in the 'Do the Math' thread.

You know, skeptics talk a lot of things but when it comes down to just DO IT, they fly. See you there.

Hi hung,
This is a thread to post theories that might be applicable to LRLs, not for calculating odds and probabilities. If you want to learn how to figure odds for flipping coins, simply read a book about probability theory. The answers were already figured out by mathematicians a long time ago. So no new theories of how it works are really needed. But if you want to post in this thread, it is about theories to explain the methods and details of how to attain long range detection. No mathematicians ever wrote any thing about this. You can post your theories of how LRL science works here so that anyone can arrive at a good understanding of how LRLs work and even build their own that works from using your theory.

But only if it works

Best wishes,
J_P

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

I've heard of the explosives "sniffer" devices, but had no idea how sensitive they were.


P.S. Does anyone know if the bloodhound has been patented?

Hi EE THr,

If we examine your example a little closer, it becomes apparent it was a difficult task for a dog to accomplish because he was looking for a scent that leaked out from a passing car into the wind. It would seem easier if a person was on foot where at least they were directly exposed to the wind and the ground they are walking on, and possibly touched some things along the way.

If we apply this method to treasure hunting it becomes even easier. We know dogs and pigs are used to hunt for truffles. These truffles are often buried several feet below the ground, and are more valuable than gold by weight. The truffle recoveries are evidence of this method working. It is convenient that the scent is in the ground and mixed with the soil, so it can continuously be released to the air where the dog can smell it and follow the trail to the source. What are the dogs smelling? They are smelling molecules which become airborne, and are sensed in a similar manner that I described above.

But what about metal treasures?
The soil above buried metal aslo releases molecules which can become airborne and be smelled by an animal or machine that is sensitive to smelling the molecule. This is because of the soil chemistry and microbes which congregate around buried metals, and attack them so they corrode. The resulting corroded metal in the soil slowly migrates toward the surface through a process called mobile metal ions. These slowly moving metal ions neutralize within the top 4-10 inches of the surface, which will cause them to leave the cyanide or sulfur complex, or the organic acids which they were previously suspended in. This happens in trace amounts, but the metal ions are detectable by taking samples of the soil to a laboratory to measure them in order to pinpoint the location of buried metals.

The same soil chemistry would also dictate the final neutralization of the metal ions near the surface would leave the scents of the chemicals that were active in the final reactions. These chemicals would not be present in neighboring soil areas in the same amounts. The scent anomaly would include an unusually higher concentration of the molecules which attach to gold, silver, platinum and other tresure metal ions in the soil, after they release the metal ion. Of course it takes some time for this chemical process and ion migration to begin. You cannot expect to find a scent being released from the soil above recently buried metals. I presume the scents of these molecules would be easier for an animal or machine to detect than the scent of a person who rode inside a car along a road some time before.

Is it possible to train a dog to recognize these smells?


Best wishes,
J_P

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

If it is only metals that have been in the ground for a long time, that would make it difficult to test, or to train a dog. Because usually if someone know of a site like that, they dig it up!

And burying something, then waiting a long time, will really slow down the experiment.

I think the problems presented for metals, would be far different than those for training a dog to find drugs or people.

Hmmm.

 

[J__P]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

If it is only metals that have been in the ground for a long time, that would make it difficult to test, or to train a dog. Because usually if someone know of a site like that, they dig it up!

And burying something, then waiting a long time, will really slow down the experiment.

I think the problems presented for metals, would be far different than those for training a dog to find drugs or people.

Hmmm.

Hi EE THr,

Yes the problems would be different. But then they would not be impossible.
There are many places where we know metals have been buried a long time. For example pipes which we know were put in the ground decades or centuries ago, and other things such as metal posts, and known locations of buried objects which could be used as training areas.

In the case of gold, an experiment was done by seeding samples of the ground with the kind of bacteria that attacks gold, and placing a handful of gold pellets a couple feet into the ground. The soil was found to have a stronger concentration of gold ions than it does for long time buried gold usually found in nature after one month for this experiment. The same method could be used to train dogs to find gold, platinum, and other less noble metals. But it may be better to use a machine to detect these, because it can be made to detect the specific molecules you want to find, and no training is necessary.

The current versions of electronic sniffing machines can easily have sensor chips to detect various molecules from the same air sample. For example we could have chips doped to detect several molecules expected to be present in the soil where gold is buried, and several for silver, platinum, etc.... with an alarm to go off indicating when each of the different metals was detected. This could be used when hunting for jewelry lost in parks that are more than 50 years old, and by river banks which have historically been swimming holes in the days before air conditioning. It would seem like a good detector to use anywhere people look for buried jewelry, except maybe not at the beaches where most jewelry is scoured daily by detectorists so there are no long time buried samples to find. It could be especially useful for nugget hunting and prospecting.

As a side note in this kind of detection, the soil chemistry is different for gold, silver and copper as well as a lot of other metals. But I am not so certain about the difference between gold and platinum. These metals dissolve mostly in natural cyanide which is secreted by bacteria. Gold ions can then be suspended in sulphur complexes or low molecular weight organic acids until they migrate close to the surface and are neurtalized. When the cyanide finally releases the gold or platinum ion, I suspect it will become bound with the same surrounding elements in the soil whether it released a gold or platinum ion. This would mean that the odor of this final cyanide compound will not tell us if it came from gold or platinum. If this is the case, then maybe there is a difference to be detected in the sulphur complexes and organic acids related to buried gold chemistry that you could smell to tell to determine it is gold. In any case, I wonder how much a treasure hunter would care if he found something made of platinum instead of gold.



Best wishes,
J_P