northwest Recent Posts
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Saturday February 24 2018 23:08:46 AEDT PM
Home Help Login Register
News: Welcome to the Australianelectronicgoldprospectingforum founded in July 2010, an add free totally independent forum with over 70 boards and paid for and managed by the Admin.Total forum Topics: 8,946   Total forum Posts:43,065 Members:708 Total page views:10,002,638  Admin and  forum and domain name owner :marjen at optusnet.com.au. Guests can only see a limited number of boards at present and cannot see any hot links. Guest cannot post and never will be permitted too!Registration of new members must be approved by admin.Anyone known to have any past or present association with Codan/ML or acting on their behalf as a proxy or intermediary  will not have their registration approved. All  original Photos and posts and  original materials displayed on this site are COPYRIGHTED and remain the property of the poster and the  Austalian electronicgoldprospectingforum.com. All messages on this forum express the personal views of the author and should not be interpreted as necessarily being in accord with those of the forum owner and neither the owner of this forum and its domain name nor SMF or the forum software developers or the forum host shall be held responsible for the content of any message. Admin reserves the right to remove any offensive or objectionable posts. No defamatory material or politics/religion or issues of race will be permitted.
HOT Topics!
The need for big deep gold detectors.
link-http://australianelectronicgoldprospectingforum.com/detector-coils/the-need-for-big-deep-gold-detectors/msg44569/?topicseen#msg44569
QED on the beaches
link-http://australianelectronicgoldprospectingforum.com/new-board-109/qed-on-the-beaches/msg44567/?topicseen#msg44567
More B/S from the idiot climate denier Inhere on Finders! 
link-http://australianelectronicgoldprospectingforum.com/climate-change/more-bs-from-the-idiot-climate-denier-inhere-on-finders!/msg44571/?topicseen#msg44571

australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10

 31 
 on: Thursday February 22 2018 14:12:57 AEDT PM 
Started by sd220d Digger - Last post by 6666
I could not bare to not dig them up.

 32 
 on: Thursday February 22 2018 13:50:06 AEDT PM 
Started by Doug - Last post by Doug
VICTORIA HILL QUARTZ GOLD MINES
  
link-http://vhd.heritagecouncil.vic.gov.au/places/5251/download-report
doug smile

 33 
 on: Thursday February 22 2018 13:44:48 AEDT PM 
Started by Doug - Last post by Doug
Phd  Thesis on WA gold  mineralization.
  
link-http://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/files/3238697/Hodge_Joanna_L_2010.pdf
doug smile

 34 
 on: Thursday February 22 2018 11:51:57 AEDT AM 
Started by Aziz - Last post by gef12
  
Hi all,

I have started shielding the prototypes the first one is finished and I am pleased with it so far the specifications shielded are Inductance 707 uh resistance 9.98 ohms shield to coil capacitance is 81.2 pf I like the carbon to paper shielding but it is a bit fiddly to apply here are some pictures for your information and it looks like SRF will be above 500 KHz.

Regards, Ian.

Didn't see this yesterday for some reason .. thou .. very nice Ian ..  quality workmanship ..
hope she performs well

 35 
 on: Thursday February 22 2018 10:52:13 AEDT AM 
Started by Doug - Last post by Doug
More B/S from the idiot climate denier Inhere on finders!
In his latest piece of climate denier rubbish Inhere posts a link which purports to show that New York’s Temperature Record has been Massively Altered By NOAA.
The author of this blog is a well known climate denier and what he concludes is scientifically flawed and  he is also guilty of the well known climate denier tactic of cherry picking!
So lets just look at one of the most serious  scientific flaws in his blog post.
He compares the raw temperatures  in Jan 2014 data, with the same month in 1943.
he says:According to NOAA, the latter was not dissimilar, with a mean of 18.7F, and a rank of 28th, for Division 10.
The scientific problem is that he is not comparing apples with apples but apples with peanuts! shocked
Why?

In the 1980s, most U.S. stations switched from liquid-in-glass to electronic resistance thermometers, which could both cool maximum temperature readings and warm minimum readings.
And
“Nearly every single station has been moved at least once over the last century, with many having 3 or more distinct moves. Most of the stations have changed from using liquid in glass thermometers (LiG) in Stevenson screens to electronic Minimum Maximum Temperature Systems (MMTS) or Automated Surface Observing Systems (ASOS). Observation times have shifted from afternoon to morning at most stations since 1960, as part of an effort by the National Weather Service to improve precipitation measurements.All of these changes introduce (non-random) systemic biases into the network. For example, MMTS sensors tend to read maximum daily temperatures about 0.5 C colder than LiG thermometers at the same location. There is a very obvious cooling bias in the record associated with the conversion of most co-op stations from LiG to MMTS in the 1980s”
Zeke Hausfather
“Having worked with many of the scientists in question, I can say with certainty that there is no grand conspiracy to artificially warm the earth; rather, scientists are doing their best to interpret large datasets with numerous biases such as station moves, instrument changes, time of observation changes, urban heat island biases, and other so-called inhomogenities that have occurred over the last 150 years. Their methods may not be perfect, and are certainly not immune from critical analysis, but that critical analysis should start out from a position of assuming good faith and with an understanding of what exactly has been done.”
So in summary you cannot compare raw temperature data obtained  using  vastly different instruments that may be  subject to the biases  mentioned above. You cannot also base your conclusions on cherry picked data! For example was the temperature in the 1943 month above or below the long term average?
The author of the blog also states:”Under the new nClimDiv system, introduced in 2014, NOAA’s methodology is extremely opaque. They don’t, to the best of my knowledge, publish the data and adjustments used.”
 This is simply not true!!
from:https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-08/documents/temperature_documentation.pdf
link-https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-08/documents/temperature_documentation.pdf

Contiguous 48 States Surface Time Series; Contiguous 48 States and Alaska Map
All GHCN-Daily stations are routinely processed through a suite of logical, serial, and spatial quality assurance reviews to identify erroneous observations. For nClimDiv, all such observations were set to “missing” before computing monthly values, which in turn were subjected to additional serial and spatial checks to eliminate residual outliers. Stations having at least 10 years of valid monthly data since 1950 were used in nClimDiv.
For temperature, bias adjustments were computed to account for historical changes in observation time, station location, temperature instrumentation, and siting conditions. As with USHCN, the method of Karl et al. (1986) was applied to remove the observation time bias from the COOP network, and the pairwise method of Menne and Williams (2009) was used to address changes in station location and instrumentation in all networks. Because the pairwise method also largely accounts for local, unrepresentative trends that arise from changes in siting conditions, nClimDiv contains no separate adjustment in that regard.
For more documentation about nClimDiv, see:   
link-ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cirs/climdiv/divisional-readme.txt
Nothing False About Temperature Data
  
link-https://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/nothing-false-about-temperature-data/
  
link-https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/dyk/nclimdiv-tmax-tmin
link-https://phys.org/news/2017-02-major-global-defended.html#jCp

Once again Inhere proves that he is nothing more than an  ill informed, scientifically illiterate right wing climate denier idiot!
The only bigger forum idiot on climate change(and most other things!) is 1/2 wit- 1Halfgram4three!!
doug smile

 36 
 on: Wednesday February 21 2018 19:37:04 AEDT PM 
Started by Aziz - Last post by Aziz
  
Hi all,

I have started shielding the prototypes the first one is finished and I am pleased with it so far the specifications shielded are Inductance 707 uh resistance 9.98 ohms shield to coil capacitance is 81.2 pf I like the carbon to paper shielding but it is a bit fiddly to apply here are some pictures for your information and it looks like SRF will be above 500 KHz.

Regards, Ian.

Hi Ian,

well done. Nice coils.  happy face

Let's look for an appropriate coax cable for the RX coil.

This is a list of coax cables:
  

For a low capacitance RX coax cable, we need relative high impedance cables. Total length 9 ft (approx. 3 m lenght).
Some of the low capacitance coils are getting too thick (outer diameter well above 10 mm).
So let's look at appropriate ones:

RG-210/U: Z0 = 93 Ohm, O.D.=6.15 mm, C=13.5 pF/ft, C=121.5 pF/9 ft, SRF = 420 kHz (may work)
RG-63 B/U: Z0 = 125 Ohm, O.D.=10.3 mm, C=10 pF/ft, C=90 pF/9 ft, SRF = 457 kHz (may work)
RG-114A/U: Z0 = 185 Ohm, O.D.=10.3 mm, C=6.5 pF/ft, C=58.5 pF/9 ft, SRF = 506 kHz (should work)

Although some coax cables lead SRF to below 500 kHz, the RX coil may still work. We just have to try it out.
So trying with the RG-210/U coax cable would be interesting. The coax cable isn't much thick and should be easily available.

Cheers,
Aziz

 37 
 on: Wednesday February 21 2018 18:39:28 AEDT PM 
Started by Aziz - Last post by Muntari
  
Hi all,

I have started shielding the prototypes the first one is finished and I am pleased with it so far the specifications shielded are Inductance 707 uh resistance 9.98 ohms shield to coil capacitance is 81.2 pf I like the carbon to paper shielding but it is a bit fiddly to apply here are some pictures for your information and it looks like SRF will be above 500 KHz.

Regards, Ian.

Great work Ian, how long did it take you to assemble..?

 38 
 on: Wednesday February 21 2018 18:37:52 AEDT PM 
Started by Aziz - Last post by Muntari
  

I think u have done this stuff before mate .. awesome stuff   lol
[/quote]

Yeah, a few times gef12  lol  happy face

And how good is Ian's work, hats off to you Ian,  great work and thanks for sharing your knowledge!

Cheers

Muntari

 39 
 on: Wednesday February 21 2018 17:22:51 AEDT PM 
Started by sd220d Digger - Last post by sd220d Digger
I saw that YouTube
It's a shame that Stinky Pete didn't dig up and show what those
targets were?

 40 
 on: Wednesday February 21 2018 16:52:52 AEDT PM 
Started by Aziz - Last post by gef12
  
Hi All,

Here is a quick assembly drawing of the 18" test coil I'm working on.

Cheers

Muntari
I think u have done this stuff before mate .. awesome stuff   lol

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10
australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Recent Posts


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder

BisdakworldClassic design by JV PACO-IN
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
gold