Specific Frequencies For Gold

[Tinkerer]

Gday All,

Guys, like it or not, i think we have to be fair to Minelab, you have to remember that now there owned by another company.
The Aussies that owned it before were honourable & they strove for the best--regardless!
Now there owned by an international company the $$$$ will rule--regardless!.

The Minelab bashers are a jealous lot that embarrass themselves--regardless!! We call them Wannabees.

Think about it, how can you have a go & discredit things when there the best there is--doesn't make sense?

I can foresee that Minelab will slowly roll downhill now it's own by another company with different principles & an unscrupulous business sense.

Then again if they still let THE MAN Mr Candy have a free reign well then they may succeed even further but more than likely they will think they know more & sidetrack this genious of a man.

Mr Candy Made Minelab, this foreign company will do well to remember this!
--------------------------------------


ML---Is Minelab.

Yes, i agree there are machines that are "almost" as good, but not better, hence there price. Almost as good is only almost as good.
I almost found a 1000 oz nugget, it just isn't the same as, i found a 1000 oz nugget

I find, Half the price, half as good--unfortunately.

I have a new circuit i have been working on frantically & infact i can detect non ferrous metals at near double the distance of the GPX4500 but gold is only around 4" more?.

I set out then to try to work this out & had a closer look just with air testing of the GPX4500.
The big surprise was that the 4500 is NOT sensitive to Aluminium Foil, this surprised me because i have always thought that the foil test was a good test for sensitivity?
Apparently not, at least not for Gold!

The 4500 can detect a small 1grm nugget at around 18cm but a 1" square of Aluminium foil at only about 5cm.
I have set my test circuit so i can detect the Aluminium Foil at 30cm but then it can only detect the 1grm nugget at around 18cm the same as the 4500.
Now if i detune it on the foil i can increase the detection distance of the 1grm nugget?.

This i don't understand & obviously i am missing the point, maybe someone else can explain this?

I have a piece of copper as well & the 4500 can detect this at 18cm & my circuit easily detects this at 40cm but still the bloody gold is only 10cm better???

I can detect an Australian $1 coin approx 25mm diameter at 30cm, this is also the same as the 4500?

AAARRRGGGHHH!

Tired & Frustrated!

B^C,

There are several different responses from the targets.
The first response is the skin effect. It is very short and is mostly related to the surface area that is presented to the coil.
Testing that, I found I could detect gold leaf that is only nanometers thick and weighs micro grams at several centimeters from the coil.
Alu foil falls into that same category. 1inch square has a TC of about 10uS.
A lead musket ball is a good example of a target that has minimal surface and maximum mass. It is a tricky target because it does not respond well for surface eddy currents but it is not a very good conductor so its TC is relatively short.
Gold nuggets are the worst targets because they have no regular shape, no proportional surface to mass relation and not even a reliable specific gravity nor density.
Gold jewelry is still worst.
So, how does this help?
You have a circuit that is capable to read different responses from the targets. This means that once you know how to "tune in" to a specific response you can tell if the target has a relatively large surface area or not, compared to its mass. Or you can tell the TC of the target.
There is a relationship between the TC of the coil and the TC of the target.
I know how to find and see it on the scope. You have observed it with your detector, now if we could find somebody who can put that into an algorythm, we could program that into an MCU.
Tinkerer

[Woody.au]

Codan is an Australian company you Goose, they bought Minelab, their share code on the ASX (Australian Stock Exchange) is CDN

Gday All,

Guys, like it or not, i think we have to be fair to Minelab, you have to remember that now there owned by another company.
The Aussies that owned it before were honourable & they strove for the best--regardless!
Now there owned by an international company the $$$$ will rule--regardless!.

The Minelab bashers are a jealous lot that embarrass themselves--regardless!! We call them Wannabees.

Think about it, how can you have a go & discredit things when there the best there is--doesn't make sense?

I can foresee that Minelab will slowly roll downhill now it's own by another company with different principles & an unscrupulous business sense.

Then again if they still let THE MAN Mr Candy have a free reign well then they may succeed even further but more than likely they will think they know more & sidetrack this genious of a man.

Mr Candy Made Minelab, this foreign company will do well to remember this!
--------------------------------------


ML---Is Minelab.

Yes, i agree there are machines that are "almost" as good, but not better, hence there price. Almost as good is only almost as good.
I almost found a 1000 oz nugget, it just isn't the same as, i found a 1000 oz nugget

I find, Half the price, half as good--unfortunately.

I have a new circuit i have been working on frantically & infact i can detect non ferrous metals at near double the distance of the GPX4500 but gold is only around 4" more?.

I set out then to try to work this out & had a closer look just with air testing of the GPX4500.
The big surprise was that the 4500 is NOT sensitive to Aluminium Foil, this surprised me because i have always thought that the foil test was a good test for sensitivity?
Apparently not, at least not for Gold!

The 4500 can detect a small 1grm nugget at around 18cm but a 1" square of Aluminium foil at only about 5cm.
I have set my test circuit so i can detect the Aluminium Foil at 30cm but then it can only detect the 1grm nugget at around 18cm the same as the 4500.
Now if i detune it on the foil i can increase the detection distance of the 1grm nugget?.

This i don't understand & obviously i am missing the point, maybe someone else can explain this?

I have a piece of copper as well & the 4500 can detect this at 18cm & my circuit easily detects this at 40cm but still the bloody gold is only 10cm better???

I can detect an Australian $1 coin approx 25mm diameter at 30cm, this is also the same as the 4500?

AAARRRGGGHHH!

Tired & Frustrated!

[Max]

Hi,
what a pile of nonsense here...

what's the title of thread ???

Isn't "Specific Frequencies For Gold" ???

Or I made a mistake about ???

It's a very common and about lunatic argumentation of LRL-belivers...btw

Then ? What are you talking about ??? NASA???

Or you mixed things... and need some multifrequency-diagram of gold detection maybe ???

Cause it's really different thing...

That's the point, you have to use right questions to get right (hopefully) answers.

Kind regards,
Max

[Woody.au]

Stupid Thread, Specific Frequency for Gold. How fast does an electron spin around the nucleus ? I think Mr Ground mineralization would slam the door shut in ones face.

[Micheal]

hi there woody,
my response to your question is mate (i have enjoyed reading many of your scripts here )If you dont know how is anybody else going to know.
My other question to you is with the vast knowledge you have with ML machines why dont you design a PI detector for all of us here to make ...that would be really great.

[homefire]

As Far as I know , All Elements have a Resonance Frequency.

Like a Spectrograph elements being burned produce a specific wave length.

It Only stands to reason that some elements, GOLD , SILVER would respond better to that frequency or a Harmonic there of.

1.729MHz is given on the Net as to the Resonance Freq of gold. Where that comes from I have no Idea.

What if you had a detector that could Emit the 3rd Sub Harmonic of that and look for a response of the Resonance Freq of 1.729MHz?

(1.72900 megahertz) divided by 3 = 576.333333 kilohertz


Both of these Frequencies are occupied by either the AM Broadcast Bands or the FM Emergency Response System bands as stated earlier.

[Max]

As Far as I know , All Elements have a Resonance Frequency.

Like a Spectrograph elements being burned produce a specific wave length.

It Only stands to reason that some elements, GOLD , SILVER would respond better to that frequency or a Harmonic there of.

1.729MHz is given on the Net as to the Resonance Freq of gold. Where that comes from I have no Idea.

What if you had a detector that could Emit the 3rd Sub Harmonic of that and look for a response of the Resonance Freq of 1.729MHz?

(1.72900 megahertz) divided by 3 = 576.333333 kilohertz


Both of these Frequencies are occupied by either the AM Broadcast Bands or the FM Emergency Response System bands as stated earlier.

Hi,
you have to understand that this data are relative to NMR stuff... and relative to the same applied magnetic field that make hydrogen (in a particular state) resonate at 100Mhz. That's some Tesla ...not nanoTesla or microTesla... but Tesla and dot.

A strong magnetic field!

Google : NMR resonance

Then... the "frequency" depends on the applied magnetic field strenght and also you need the sample/target be immersed in a uniform field... like happens in NMR machines.

Now... tell me how do you think you can do NMR from remote.

Impossible.

And really LRL-belivers topic... already discussed here.

Kind regards,
Max

[Tinkerer]

I think I have to come to the rescue of B^C who started this thread.

His question has nothing to do with LRL.

It has to do with the response of gold to a pulse for a PI type detector.

Tinkerer

[Esteban]

Yes, I remember that the original question was regarding pulses in PI, not LRLs. Some guy is urinating out the jar...

I think I have to come to the rescue of B^C who started this thread.

His question has nothing to do with LRL.

It has to do with the response of gold to a pulse for a PI type detector.

Tinkerer

[Max]

Yes, I remember that the original question was regarding pulses in PI, not LRLs. Some guy is urinating out the jar...

Hi,
isn't the title of thread "Specific Frequencies For Gold" ???

Or I read it wrong...???

Then ? What's that PI magic frequency that help you find specifically GOLD !?

Tell me...

As always... someone urinate out of the jar... then other users... just slip over and fall on the floor...

Next time I'll try to aim better... I promise!

Kind regards,
Max

[Qiaozhi]

Hahaha!
A good Chinglish example, with terrible translation.

It would be better to say:
Slippery floor. Please be careful.
When taking a shower/bath, please use towel to wipe floor.

Literal translation never sounds correct. But it's not so funny that way.

[Fred]

Excellent, all the wisdom of the world in a single phrase: "fall down carefully"
Chinese of course

[Qiaozhi]

Excellent, all the wisdom of the world in a single phrase: "fall down carefully"
Chinese of course

If you take it literally it says: "careful slippery fall".

[Tinkerer]

Hi,
isn't the title of thread "Specific Frequencies For Gold" ???

Or I read it wrong...???

Then ? What's that PI magic frequency that help you find specifically GOLD !?

Tell me...

As always... someone urinate out of the jar... then other users... just slip over and fall on the floor...

Next time I'll try to aim better... I promise!

Kind regards,
Max

Ah, the intricacies of translation!!!!
Quite obvious in this case. Less obvious when the translation is between English colloquial and English electronic technical language.
Or even English from different parts of the world.
Anyway, my mother tongue is not English either.

The question about a specific frequency for gold, refers to the TC or time constant of gold. Gold in general has a short time constant (TC).
In this instance, short or long are comparative. Silver is long. Lead is short.

High purity gold of 24 carat, does not occur in nature. Most natural gold has several percent of impurities, often silver, platinum, copper etc. up to 20%.

These impurities are usually fairly constant to a certain region and very constant to a certain mine. So much so, that it is possible to some degree to tell where in the world a specific sample of natural gold was taken.

The impurities in the gold produce significant changes in the TC of the sample. Meaning if you take two gold coins of identical shape and weight, and both of 20 carat purity, but different metals in the impurity, the two coins will have a different TC.

It is possible to design a metal detector to be most sensitive for a specific TC.
B^C's nugget hunting fields probably produce a fairly even purity of gold, so there is the origin of the question.

I might just as well give an answer to the question too:
If the nuggets were all the same size, the same weight and the same shape, then one could build a VLF detector at a specific frequency, to be most sensitive for this kind of nugget.

The TC of an IB-PI amounts to the equivalence of the frequency of the VLF.

Tinkerer

[Max]

Ah, the intricacies of translation!!!!
Quite obvious in this case. Less obvious when the translation is between English colloquial and English electronic technical language.
Or even English from different parts of the world.
Anyway, my mother tongue is not English either.

The question about a specific frequency for gold, refers to the TC or time constant of gold. Gold in general has a short time constant (TC).
In this instance, short or long are comparative. Silver is long. Lead is short.

High purity gold of 24 carat, does not occur in nature. Most natural gold has several percent of impurities, often silver, platinum, copper etc. up to 20%.

These impurities are usually fairly constant to a certain region and very constant to a certain mine. So much so, that it is possible to some degree to tell where in the world a specific sample of natural gold was taken.

The impurities in the gold produce significant changes in the TC of the sample. Meaning if you take two gold coins of identical shape and weight, and both of 20 carat purity, but different metals in the impurity, the two coins will have a different TC.

It is possible to design a metal detector to be most sensitive for a specific TC.
B^C's nugget hunting fields probably produce a fairly even purity of gold, so there is the origin of the question.

I might just as well give an answer to the question too:
If the nuggets were all the same size, the same weight and the same shape, then one could build a VLF detector at a specific frequency, to be most sensitive for this kind of nugget.

The TC of an IB-PI amounts to the equivalence of the frequency of the VLF.

Tinkerer

Hi,
as said... the title is wrong. The good answers could be provided (hopefully) just if the question is made the right way.

Time constant is different thing from frequency.

Time constant in decay of PI tx waveform is different thing from VLF frequency at oscillator or rx coil.

If we are talking about PI have no sense talking about "frequency" cause we work in time domain scenario where we measure e.g. time constants to attempt disc.

If we talk of VLF the frequency could have a meaning... but depends on disc system/design. In some designs (today) it's phase shift that's employed to disc stuff... not frequency.

In older stuff, working at VLF range, there was a frequency shift (BFO or off-resonance) that indicate nature/composition of target.

Mixing stuff don't help solve troubles.

So... if I say "I wanna know what's frequency specific for gold" I say a big BS and , obviously, people will start making humor and talk about LRLs.
Then a smarter one will talk about pi$$ and jars... with interesting results.

Kind regards,
Max