field test unit no 001 "model T"

[Qiaozhi]

For all....Why does it ALWAYS have to be referred to a Minelab beating coil?

Aziz, I do respect you to some point from your past honest contributions (slowly fading though),
But dont you think recently you have totally gone off topic?

Everyone here is to learn, not to listen too how your life may be treating you.

Posting in the off topic section may be a better option for you as a suggestion if something not detector related is bothering you..

Not trying to have a go at you, just frustrated with the irrelevant comments which is making the Geotech experience very un-welcomed and un-pleasant.

Sid

Actually, I couldn't have said it much better.

So ... once again ... at the risk of getting repetitive (though not as repetitive as this thread) please, please STOP the bickering. If you want to bite each other's heads off, go and do it on Doug's Forum.

Aziz and others - we all know you have some sort of gripe with Minelab. None of us actually care what the gripe is, or if you have some sort of delusion that you're going to make the company go bust by inventing the world's best whatever. If you have something technically interesting, then either show it here in public, or hide it away until you do have something. This silly argument has been going on for years now without any sign of an end in sight. If this continues, I will simply lock the thread. No excuses.

Whether you like it or not, Minelab do make a lot of really good detectors. If you feel otherwise, then don't buy one. It's as simple as that.

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

Actually, I couldn't have said it much better.

So ... once again ... at the risk of getting repetitive (though not as repetitive as this thread) please, please STOP the bickering. If you want to bite each other's heads off, go and do it on Doug's Forum.

Aziz and others - we all know you have some sort of gripe with Minelab. None of us actually care what the gripe is, or if you have some sort of delusion that you're going to make the company go bust by inventing the world's best whatever. If you have something technically interesting, then either show it here in public, or hide it away until you do have something. This silly argument has been going on for years now without any sign of an end in sight. If this continues, I will simply lock the thread. No excuses.

Whether you like it or not, Minelab do make a lot of really good detectors. If you feel otherwise, then don't buy one. It's as simple as that.

AMEN!!!

[Aziz]

Nix Amen! *LOL*
We have got high performance PI coils, which go deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep now.
I am really looking forward to the next battle.

^sif,
the "World's Best Coil Meister" *LOL*

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

Nix Amen! *LOL*
We have got high performance PI coils, which go deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep now.
I am really looking forward to the next battle.

^sif,
the "World's Best Coil Meister" *LOL*

Give it up Aziz. Everyone, and I mean everyone is tired of your boasting. You say

"We have got high performance PI coils, which go deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep now"

". Well lets see one since you have them now. And I am sure they have been tested out in the field, or you could not make such a claim. So before your next "battle" lets see what you have produced. Which I am sure is not a thing that someone can go and use on their detector.

I agree with Qiaozhi that your Minelab bashing and bragging about a detector or coil which has never seen the light of day being better than what is available to the public is getting wore out.

[Qiaozhi]

We have got high performance PI coils, which go deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep now.

This is now the Last Chance Saloon.
Either post a video of the coil in operation, or don't bother mentioning it anymore.
It's time to show and tell.

We've received several compalints about two particular threads in the Geotech forums. and this is one of them. The other one has already been locked, and this one is very close to the same fate. Please keep the discussions technical without the bickering, sniping, and silly comments. We can only take so much vapour-ware and BS, and unfortunately this thread is full of it.

[Qiaozhi]

Aziz - Please stop wingeing that your posts have been removed. They were full of profanity and name calling, and contained no useful technical content.
If you make extraordinary claims, then be prepared to prove them in practice. Repeating the same thing ad infinitum will not make it come true. It's not up to everyone else to prove you wrong. You should know that you cannot prove a negative.
This is not up for discussion, so don't even try.
Next time the thread will be closed, and you'll be taking a sabbatical from Geotech.

[Aziz]

Aziz - Please stop wingeing that your posts have been removed. They were full of profanity and name calling, and contained no useful technical content.
If you make extraordinary claims, then be prepared to prove them in practice. Repeating the same thing ad infinitum will not make it come true. It's not up to everyone else to prove you wrong. You should know that you cannot prove a negative.
This is not up for discussion, so don't even try.
Next time the thread will be closed, and you'll be taking a sabbatical from Geotech.

Mr. Q,

you are really getting unfair now. Stop the censoring.
And you are beginning to disappoint me.
^sif

[Qiaozhi]

Mr. Q,

you are really getting unfair now. Stop the censoring.
And you are beginning to disappoint me.
^sif

Aziz - You need to understand something:

It's not the fact that you're pushing ideas which only exist in a simulation, with no practical experiments to back it up, as this scenario often exists on Geotech, and can lead to some interesting discussions. The problem is the profanity, name calling, and frequent references to the end of you-know-who, the start of a thermo-nuclear meltdown, etc, etc. You probably get away with this behaviour on Doug's Forum, but everyone here is generally fed up with it and we're getting a lot of compaints from other members. So ... if you want to be taken seriously, cut out the crap, and stick with the technical stuff.

[Aziz]

Ok Mr. Q, that is fair.

To be fair enough, I want someone proving me wrong. The latest results are based on true & hard facts, that no one can really ignore them.
Who dares to prove me wrong?
^sif

[Qiaozhi]

Ok Mr. Q, that is fair.

To be fair enough, I want someone proving me wrong. The latest results are based on true & hard facts, that no one can really ignore them.
Who dares to prove me wrong?
^sif

This is where the arguments arise, as no-one can actually prove you wrong. What you should be asking is: "Please look at my simulation results and see if you agree with my findings".
The challenge of: "Who dares to prove me wrong?", is just asking for trouble.

If I claim I've put a teapot in orbit around the Earth, and then challenge you to prove me wrong, you'll find this to be an impossible task. You simply cannot prove a negative, as when you come back and say that you've looked everywhere and couldn't find it, and therefore I must be lying, my reply wil simply be that you haven't been looking in the right place.

I know the above analogy is not exactly the same, but hopefully you get the point.

Your next step should be to perform some practical experiments and compare them to the simulation results. The real world has a nasty habit of screwing up the best of ideas.

[Aziz]

Next time, I'll definitely put a teapot into the orbit. This seems to be a much easier task. *LOL*

Comeon guys, please please, look at my results and verify the coil simulation results.

^sif

[Carl-NC]

Why don't you just build the damned coil and demonstrate that it does what you say it should do? How hard can that be?

[Aziz]

Why don't you just build the damned coil and demonstrate that it does what you say it should do? How hard can that be?

Yep, why don't you just build the damned coil and demonstrate that it does what I say it should do? How hard can that be?

We are going nowhere with such arguments.
I'm 100% trusting in my simulations & calculations.
^sif

[goldnomad]

Yep, why don't you just build the damned coil and demonstrate that it does what I say it should do? How hard can that be?

We are going nowhere with such arguments.
I'm 100% trusting in my simulations & calculations.
^sif

"Build it and they will come" (quote: Field of Dreams)
We aren't even 1% trusting in your simulations and calculations until you make one.
I believe that mathematicians will find the last digit of Pi before you have a working coil.

Btw ^sif, who's detector will you use to test your coil?

Robert

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

Aziz there are several other threads about building coils and testing them. Why are you not there showing them how to do it right? I am sure they would welcome a person as good as you are at coil design.

Oh wait! They are actually building and testing them out in the field. I forgot that part. Sorry.