Amount Of Gold Vs Metal Detectors

[Kostas 13]

There are some who argue that pure gold when in very large quantities is undetectable by metal detectors... please i would like to know if scientifically this theory can be valid. thanks.

[Steve Herschbach]

Define what you mean. A large lump of gold? Tiny gold dispersed in soil or rock? At what distance?

This is not a theory. The theory would be saying you could pick up a fist sized nugget a mile away. Then you’d have to prove that theory. Saying something can’t be detected does not need proof. It’s trying to prove a negative. The LRL peoples like to take that stance. Prove my LRL can’t detect this or that. No, that’s not how we do things. They need to prove it can detect what they say at the distances they quote. Nobody has to prove they don’t work.

[Kostas 13]

Hi Steve The theory suggested is that Vlf or pi metal detectors cannot detect a large amount of gold for example 20 one kilo gold bars at a depth of one meter in soft ground.

I'm mentioning a theory that a friend advocates on a forum we discuss in my country.

 

I disagree with all of you, but it is also very easily explained as it refers to the physical properties of matter

Let's take the two main differences of bodies into magnetic and diamagnetic (we leave aside paramagnetic and antiferromagnetic), when they are under the influence of an external magnetic field (eg the one momentarily formed by the detector)

In the first we have the formation of Weiss regions with a magnetic moment in the same direction as the intensity of the external magnetic field, due to the motion of orientation of the outer electron shell.

In the second, due to the movement of electrons around the nucleus of the atom, the ""production"" of an inductive current. This current is oriented in such a way that the magnetic moment corresponding to it is OPPOSITE to the intensity of the external magnetic field, i.e. the one momentarily formed by the detector. That is, while in magnetic materials the movement of electrons in the outer layer plays a role and there the magnetic field formed inside the body ADDS to that of the detector, in diamagnetic materials the movement of electrons in the outer layer plays no role. as to the orientation of the field, but the motion of the electron around the nucleus plays a role, with the result that the strength of the opposite in terms of the moment of the magnetic field, is SUBTRACTED from the strength of its magnetic probe.

In short, the more gold, the higher its resistance.

[Steve Herschbach]

Those bars even if pure gold can be detected with the right instrument, say a Minelab with a large coil or a two box detector. Metals being pure make them more detector, not less. It’s all about conductivity, and alloys usually lower conductivity. Pure gold is more detectable than gold alloys, not less. And the more gold you have, the more detectable it is, not less. The assertion itself is incorrect in the face of it and so needs no theory to explain it.

Gold bars packed tightly together in contact with each other will be more detectable than gold bars spread about.

 

[GB_Amateur]

15 hours ago, Kostas 13 said:

In short, the more gold, the higher its resistance.

Consider the following (a thought experiment which can be done, although might cost a bit...)?

1) Take a 1 ozt rectangular flat gold bar, place it on the ground, and swing over it from a certain non-negligible distance, say 3 inches.  Note its signal strength.

2) Carefully (😁) cut the bar in half, replacing half where you previously put the full bar and keeping the other half well away from the coil so it has not effect.

3) Swing the coil over the half bar at the same height you did for the full bar and note the signal strength.

You claim that the resistance will increase when more gold is present.  Do you also claim the signal strength is larger for the half bar in the above experiment than for the full bar?

 

[Kostas 13]

9 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Αυτές οι ράβδοι, ακόμα κι αν καθαρός χρυσός μπορούν να ανιχνευθούν με το κατάλληλο όργανο, ας πούμε ένα Minelab με ένα μεγάλο πηνίο ή έναν ανιχνευτή δύο κιβωτίων. Το ότι τα μέταλλα είναι καθαρά τα καθιστούν περισσότερο ανιχνευτές, όχι λιγότερο. Όλα έχουν να κάνουν με την αγωγιμότητα και τα κράματα συνήθως χαμηλότερης αγωγιμότητας. Ο καθαρός χρυσός είναι πιο ανιχνεύσιμος από τα κράματα χρυσού, όχι λιγότερο. Και όσο περισσότερο χρυσό έχετε, τόσο πιο ανιχνεύσιμο είναι, όχι λιγότερο.  Ο ίδιος ο ισχυρισμός είναι λανθασμένος μπροστά σε αυτό και επομένως δεν χρειάζεται καμία θεωρία για να τον εξηγήσει.

Οι ράβδοι χρυσού που συσκευάζονται σφιχτά μεταξύ τους σε επαφή μεταξύ τους θα είναι πιο ανιχνεύσιμες από τις ράβδους χρυσού που απλώνονται.

 

I have the same opinion as yours.

[EL NINO77]

Kostas... the detector working only in dynamic mode with discrimination... can pass various large or complex highly conductive targets,, so that it gives an iron signal to such a target,,, so if you use iron discrimination, you can pass such a target...

It can be a column of large silver highly conductive coins, a pile of coins or larger pieces of highly conductive metals/even pure gold/..

But the detector that works in Mix mode/ 2 channels -pseudostatic channel + dynamic-discrimination channel /.....even if the discrimination channel of the detector failed to identify the signal, the pseudostatic channel will warn you that there are  bigger target under the coil. ..