QED

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

Patches junior how could anyone ever take you seriously with what you have posted about the QED on various forums when:
You do not have the QED schematics.
You do not have the QED board layout.
You do not have the source codes for the QED firmware.
You do not know the kind of boards being used in the QED.
You have not tested the QED in the field (as I have!)
You do not have access to any of the non published test results.
So any posts on the QED by Patches junior should be instantly be dismissed as having zero creditability because he does not have either the essential information or is qualified to post anything on the QED that has any technical merit or validity. Everything that Patches junior has ever posted on the QED is just completely wrong!!!

dougAEGPF

Doug, Doug are you OK? You quoted me just above this post as if you were talking about the post of mine you quoted. But you failed to talk about what you quoted. Settle down and make some sense instead of going off on some tyrant. You are going to drive your self crazy and shut down your own forum or something. The "onus" is on you to prove I know nothing about the QED. I know more than you think. Robbie and friends which will nor be named have been teaching me for years and years (about the same time the QED was to be released) about detector electronics. Especially about gold detectors! But since you don't think there should be a detector made for gold, I am wasting my time trying to teach you about them.

How are the puppies doing? Getting big I bet! Talk to you later my friend.

[ivconic]

Man this is the craziest thread I've read.
......

That's because of many wild "harmonics" presence here!

[detecto]

You should know, that electronics is pure math with voltages & currents. Mainly in the complex domain.

Guess what. I have learned to do some math.
Sorry, but the computer science can not be compared with electronics. It is going beyond the possibilities of electronics.

Aziz

"It is going beyond the possibilities of electronics."
LOL, i never heard such think :S

Everyone has the right on his opinion
Regards
Detecto

[Aziz]

Aziz
as i mention somewhere here i am studing electronic precisly electronic and microprocessor tehnology, final year, (5th)
I aprisiate you'r knowlage of computer sciance, i realy understang what mean when someone is academic educated (nothing especial at all :P )
What are separating academic educated peopple from uneducated people?
Intaligence? NOOOO
Just a will for learning and persistence nothing more.
Just bu reading you'r posts i can conclude that you are smart man, not just me anyone
and not just you smart, a lot of peopple here on forum are smart
I have a little fill that you not look at the points from all angles, try to change that (this is my friendly advice)
In electronic generally you can divide people to ~ and 100101.
I see that you are one of those 100101 and they are cool for me.
But from my expiriance better to be little ~~~~~~~
I want to say better to be little more non digital.
When you said that computers are you'r primar school i completely understand you and you'r access to metal detectors with 0101010101010 (binary).
I apologise for my joke with laptop simulation on thread IGSl.
Honestly i much more like not so digital access to metal detectors, because i hate to program microcontrolers
Only one think is good when you making MD with MCU, only physics and you'r imagination can limit you


Regards
Detecto

You should know, that electronics is pure math with voltages & currents. Mainly in the complex domain.

Guess what. I have learned to do some math.
Sorry, but the computer science can not be compared with electronics. It is going beyond the possibilities of electronics.

Aziz

[bklein]

Man this is the craziest thread I've read.
Seems like it is a carry-over from another forum and you guys agreed to move it here - much like a ham radio conversation moving to a different band...

You guys started talking about this QED then started listing issues -
1) Sensitivity or issue with "harmonics".
2) Sensitivity to "mains frequencies".
3) Picking up radio stations.
4) Board layout issues(?)
5) Detector cannot operate near one of the same model.

How about splitting each of these into separate threads(?)
What are the symptoms of "harmonic sensitivity"?
My detectors all are sensitive to "mains" frequencies - I have underground AC in my housing tract and it seriously messes with all of my detectors (Tesoro, Minelab, Whites...) It does seem to depend on time of day - I can't figure out why.
Mine don't pick up radio station interference but I can see how that could easily happen given the gains and types of opamps commonly used. Usually easy fixes for this.
Don't most detectors have issues working near others of the same model?


Maybe you guys are all just under the influence of many beers and having good fun.

[detecto]

I like that minelab audio
I guess audio part is taken from SD2000?
Regards
Detecto

[bugwhiskers]

Making a successful PI detector is not rocket science.
The key requisites are ultra high SNR and a GB/SMF cancellation method with minimum target signal loss.
Fortunately, Poole and Howells back in 1979 patented a GB method that claimed two or more samples to create a null summation or linear combination to cancel the ground. Ten months later Corbyn proposed another method whereby a synthesised ground curve was subtracted to cancel the ground. this was also a null summation/linear combination. The problem with his method was that the coil to ground distance had to be constant as there was no easy method to adjust the synthesised ground to compensate.
The TDI uses a variation of Poole and Howells work with the addition of SMF/EMI cancellation.
The patented QED GB/SMF method also uses an improved micro controlled variation of Poole and Howells lapsed patent.

The following link shows the QED fitted with a 10" MONO coil being tested with a 0.08 gram nugget and a beer can. Notice the lack of EMI in the workshop, this is the result of the patented Synchronous Mains Rejection.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dgZzGOIPlQ&feature=plcp

Any suggestions on the best way to market it, partial kit, full kit, fully built on ebay?

[detecto]

Ivconic,

that shouldn't be a problem to you.
I am an HUGE trial & error master of puppet too (particularly on electronics - sadly, that's not my profession).


But...
You guys forget, that I have an academic degree of computer science. I know (or should know) how to process (signal) data. That's the point, where you all get sceptic.

I can assure you, that you all definitely underestimating the possibilities of computer science. There exist algorithms to extract the useful information out of the noisy (or almost seen as "uncorrelated") data.

But all claims said by me remain to be sceptic. It is intended to be sceptic. It could be B..ls..t. or the truth. Who knows? Maybe the patent trolls?

Aziz

Aziz
as i mention somewhere here i am studing electronic precisly electronic and microprocessor tehnology, final year, (5th)
I aprisiate you'r knowlage of computer sciance, i realy understang what mean when someone is academic educated (nothing especial at all :P )
What are separating academic educated peopple from uneducated people?
Intaligence? NOOOO
Just a will for learning and persistence nothing more.
Just bu reading you'r posts i can conclude that you are smart man, not just me anyone
and not just you smart, a lot of peopple here on forum are smart
I have a little fill that you not look at the points from all angles, try to change that (this is my friendly advice)
In electronic generally you can divide people to ~ and 100101.
I see that you are one of those 100101 and they are cool for me.
But from my expiriance better to be little ~~~~~~~
I want to say better to be little more non digital.
When you said that computers are you'r primar school i completely understand you and you'r access to metal detectors with 0101010101010 (binary).
I apologise for my joke with laptop simulation on thread IGSl.
Honestly i much more like not so digital access to metal detectors, because i hate to program microcontrolers
Only one think is good when you making MD with MCU, only physics and you'r imagination can limit you


Regards
Detecto

[dougAEGPF]

Gosh darn it Carl. And here I was going to start building a gold detector and brag about it for a few years before I started building it!

But your post makes perfect sense to me. None of the major players brag about their next machine for years during the R&D of it. I can't think of anyone who would do such a thing!

Patches junior how could anyone ever take you seriously with what you have posted about the QED on various forums when:
You do not have the QED schematics.
You do not have the QED board layout.
You do not have the source codes for the QED firmware.
You do not know the kind of boards being used in the QED.
You have not tested the QED in the field (as I have!)
You do not have access to any of the non published test results.
So any posts on the QED by Patches junior should be instantly be dismissed as having zero creditability because he does not have either the essential information or is qualified to post anything on the QED that has any technical merit or validity. Everything that Patches junior has ever posted on the QED is just completely wrong!!!

dougAEGPF

[hdphilip]

hey guys,

it's been good reading, but i need to go work on my chipkit experimental metal detector.

keep up the good work!


Philip

[ivconic]

Ivconic,

that shouldn't be a problem to you.
I am HUGE trial & error master of puppet too (particularly on electronics - sadly, that's not my profession).


But...
You guys forget, that I have an academic degree of computer science. I know (or should know) how to process (signal) data. That's the point, where you all get sceptic.

I can assure you, that you all definitely underestimating the possibilities of computer science. There exist algorithms to extract the useful information out of the noisy (or uncorrelated) data.

But all claims said by me remain to be sceptic. It is intended to be sceptic. It could be B..ls..t. or the truth. Who knows? Maybe the patent trolls?

Aziz

I guess we will have to wait to see material aspect of your work... for how long more?
Some funny guys from Toulouse appeared in public once in the past, claiming they have something REAL to offer, so i gave them my time and my full attention as potential customer and finally i ended up with XP GMP than and Deus now days.
Seems those funny guys are really mean business, because i have no complains on their work at all. Same criteria, as customer, i am ready to use on anybody's else offers too. But FIRST condition is: at least to have something MATERIAL to offer and not just plain words!
So if you are really having right stuff to offer - don't hesitate and don't be afraid! Go for it!
I will be just another of many customers in long line that expects your miracle products.
See the point?

[Aziz]

No, actually i am starting to be upset right now with your insisting on something which is indeed trivial.
Of course i am HUGE trial&error master of pupets!
Everybody can see that here on forum.
Just follow TGSL chronology and you will see who is real trial&error "efendy" here!
Aziz, you don't have to be very bright person to realise that already!
And i am not taking that personal nor serious at all, i swear!
It is you who is having issues with that, so it seems!
PATCHES JUNIOR is giving you very friendly and smart advice.
Not because of me, i really do respect you, but because of the many other members here.
And look what we done here!? Subject is something quite different, you know?

Ivconic,

that shouldn't be a problem to you.
I am an HUGE trial & error master of puppet too (particularly on electronics - sadly, that's not my profession).


But...
You guys forget, that I have an academic degree of computer science. I know (or should know) how to process (signal) data. That's the point, where you all get sceptic.

I can assure you, that you all definitely underestimating the possibilities of computer science. There exist algorithms to extract the useful information out of the noisy (or almost seen as "uncorrelated") data.

But all claims said by me remain to be sceptic. It is intended to be sceptic. It could be B..ls..t. or the truth. Who knows? Maybe the patent trolls?

Aziz

[ivconic]

Ivconic,

you are really upset with the "trial & error"-engineer statement. Take it easy my friend. I'm a "trial & error"-engineer.
Aziz

No, actually i am starting to be upset right now with your insisting on something which is indeed trivial.
Of course i am HUGE trial&error master of pupets!
Everybody can see that here on forum.
Just follow TGSL chronology and you will see who is real trial&error "efendy" here!
Aziz, you don't have to be very bright person to realise that already!
And i am not taking that personal nor serious at all, i swear!
It is you who is having issues with that, so it seems!
PATCHES JUNIOR is giving you very friendly and smart advice.
Not because of me, i really do respect you, but because of the many other members here.
And look what we done here!? Subject is something quite different, you know?

[Aziz]

Aziz, you been hanging out with Doug too long. Your starting to get caught up in his ways of being arrogant. Stop while your ahead. You are just digging a deep hole here and do not see it my friend. Relax and stop with the arrogance!

Ivconic, bklein, Davor, Carl and I are just trying to be friendly, why the attitude??

PJ,

sorry for being arrogant. I love provocation.

But is the statement "World's best metal detecting technology" arrogant too?
I just use the same tools of being arrogant.

Cheers,
Aziz

[Aziz]

Ivconic,

you are really upset with the "trial & error"-engineer statement. Take it easy my friend. I'm a "trial & error"-engineer.
Aziz