[Island Chris]

Yup, still M7.5. Hmm, Duffy, maybe post a concise explanation of how you tell magnitude (bigger signal must be it), and that general region might be path from some transmitter? Have "explanation" or something like that as subject line. Again, concise. I can't believe I'm saying that, because I am rarely concise, and I find that Roger's excessive conciseness sometimes lead to miscommunication.

Chris

[Roger Hunter]

(03-30-2015, 10:56 AM)Island Chris Wrote: Yup, still M7.5. Hmm, Duffy, maybe post a concise explanation of how you tell magnitude (bigger signal must be it), and that general region might be path from some transmitter? Have "explanation" or something like that as subject line. Again, concise. I can't believe I'm saying that, because I am rarely concise, and I find that Roger's excessive conciseness sometimes lead to miscommunication.

Chris

Sorry. Two finger typing gets tiresome.

Roger

[Skywise]

(03-30-2015, 06:36 PM)Roger Hunter Wrote: Sorry. Two finger typing gets tiresome.

Roger

hahaha... all these years of playing on computers and you still haven't learned to type!

Brian

[Duffy]

(03-30-2015, 10:56 AM)Island Chris Wrote: Yup, still M7.5. Hmm, Duffy, maybe post a concise explanation of how you tell magnitude (bigger signal must be it), and that general region might be path from some transmitter? Have "explanation" or something like that as subject line. Again, concise. I can't believe I'm saying that, because I am rarely concise, and I find that Roger's excessive conciseness sometimes lead to miscommunication.

Chris

Good point Chris!, how do I tell magnitude?, I think I was as concise as I could be in the image-less tutorials I posted some weeks ago. But to put things in perspective, I am trying to detect a hypothetical electromagnetic surge from the Earth, which precedes an Earthquake of a given magnitude. The magnitude estimate is purely determined from the signal strength and duration of the surge recorded, experience has shown, the further the distance from the antenna, the higher the magnitude has to be to receive anything. Also, in most cases, the EM surges are accompanied by major disruption in the VLF traces, which is attributed to a hypothetical gas. In a nut shell, I'm using a specially adapted antenna to catch a bolt of lightning from the Earth, which produces an electric cloud in the process. I understand that it Doesn't sound very believable yet, the Mexican quake could have been a fluke, as could be the resent warning of aspect changes, hope this was concise enough!.

Speaking of changes, I've learnt a lot since I joined Earthwaves, upgraded the systems with a $2500 makeover, have 3 independent antennas searching for EM signals, and now have 24/7 coverage. But after this morning, the most important thing I've learnt is "DON'T change something that works!!!".

The last couple of days, the new monitors have been picking up decreases in noise line reception and sporadic trace disruptions, prior to this, they were recording normal signal reception, hence the aspect change warning. The magnitude reference above was workable with the old system, after the 7.5 last night, I've realised the new monitors are processing the signals differently to what I'm use to. So today I took the day off work to run an experiment, the conclusion of which I couldn't fully understand (Brian may have an explanation), but It has put some things into perspective.

|Using 2 identical antenna's and feed lines, I connected them to 2 monitors, one was a $1000 Dell Latitude, and the other a $40 year 2000 model Toshiba off Ebay. A lightning storm was occurring in the Netherlands, which the Toshiba had no problem picking up, the Dell however continued with a normal trace. I inter changed feed lines and antenna's several times, and in every scenario only the Toshiba recorded the storm, until it was out of range. I'm no computer technician, but this suggests to me that something's been added in the new tec that wasn't in the old, some kind of RF or EMI inhibitor perhaps?.

As a quick analogy, I use a 28 year old Icom PCR 1000 communications receiver to listen to meteor showers, I use this model because some guy in a book said you can't get a better receiver from then to the present for catching the fainter meteor's. All receivers have AGC (automatic Gain Control) which can inhibit lower dB frequencies. Modern receivers all have AGC high or low mode but no off switch, the PCR 1000 is still the only one to date (by the book) with an AGC off switch!. There's a website called "Spam 3D" which shows real-time meteor data provided by amateur astronomers running Spectrum Lab, nearly all are using the PCR 1000. Is there something to be said for old tec??.

I hope this was a good enough analogy to be concise about why I've taken the decision to change everything back to pre-Earthwaves specifications.

Sorry Roger, back on 12 hour shifts again, I think new tec issues, combined with 3 identical antenna's in close proximity to each other,and my own self-assuredness, isn't going to get me anywhere.

For the moment, I think I'll try and predict an Earthquake or two and see were it leads, might even get the magnitude right .

Duffy;

(Two finger typing plays havoc with your distal phalanges )

[Skywise]

(03-30-2015, 10:32 PM)Duffy Wrote: Using 2 identical antenna's and feed lines, I connected them to 2 monitors, one was a $1000 Dell Latitude, and the other a $40 year 2000 model Toshiba off Ebay.

Duffy, when you say "connected", exactly what do you mean? How are you connecting the antennae to the computer? Any equipment in between? (amps, filters, baluns, etc....)

I hope I'm not prying into any 'secret technology', but the more you can say the easier we (I?) might be able to explain the difference.

Brian

[Island Chris]

Wow Duffy, is that how "concise" is defined in England? But, I read and followed your post.

One of the issues more and more for me is that I am stressed out too much from work and other issues, and as I get older and older it becomes harder to absorb information. But, in general I am following this. Not the technical side very much, but we have Brian for that.

While I posted some skepticism before, you do have a scientific approach and you have the best chance (only chance) of anyone posting here to actually be on to something (even if only a 10% chance), with the psychic Tim who had a scary-close prediction of the 2004 Parkfield quake being an exception. (of course, one prediction does not demonstrate much).

Chris

[Duffy]

(03-31-2015, 10:51 AM)Island Chris Wrote: Wow Duffy, is that how "concise" is defined in England? But, I read and followed your post.

One of the issues more and more for me is that I am stressed out too much from work and other issues, and as I get older and older it becomes harder to absorb information. But, in general I am following this. Not the technical side very much, but we have Brian for that.

While I posted some skepticism before, you do have a scientific approach and you have the best chance (only chance) of anyone posting here to actually be on to something (even if only a 10% chance), with the psychic Tim who had a scary-close prediction of the 2004 Parkfield quake being an exception. (of course, one prediction does not demonstrate much).

Chris

Sorry Chris!, sounds like you took offence at something here?, honestly, there was non intended if you did. I had a bad day and your stressed, as you mentioned, there can be miss- communication here, especially in type, already played this game with Roger and don't particularly want a re-match (We'll have Brian reaching for his migraine pill's again ).

If there's any particular aspect you wish me to elaborate on, I shall end-ever to respond the best I'm able, or as much as the project allows.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, hopefully it should yeald better than 10% if I get it running as before,,, went like a bull at a gate changing everything, VERY un-scientific.

I'm sure I watched a TV program about the Parkfield quake last summer, is this the one were the USGS flooded the area with cash and resources, for a predicted early 90's quake, that didn't materialise for a further 12 years?.

Hope we're cool here now, might be alot to get through in the future.

Duffy;

(anyone know were psychic Tim is now?, might want to buy some frogs )

[Duffy]

(03-30-2015, 11:23 PM)Skywise Wrote:

(03-30-2015, 10:32 PM)Duffy Wrote: Using 2 identical antenna's and feed lines, I connected them to 2 monitors, one was a $1000 Dell Latitude, and the other a $40 year 2000 model Toshiba off Ebay.

Duffy, when you say "connected", exactly what do you mean? How are you connecting the antennae to the computer? Any equipment in between? (amps, filters, baluns, etc....)

I hope I'm not prying into any 'secret technology', but the more you can say the easier we (I?) might be able to explain the difference.

Brian

Your not prying Brian, but it is a bit out in the open for a full spec run-down at the moment. However, I can tell you with a high degree of certainty that it's not connection problems, or issues with spectrum settings.

I'm not to bad at bench testing and elimination, but I'm far from understanding the inner workings of laptops, I was hoping you could shed some light on why a 14" Dell with a 6 cell battery can operate for 8 hours, when similar size and year models like Fujitsu or Samsung operate for 3 to 4 hours?. I don't think it's different battery tec because I have several old Toshiba laptop's here (11 to be exact, stamps isn't really my thing), all the same year and model, but with 6 different serial numbers. I've tested them all with a new internal battery, and they all operated for a period of 2 to 2.5 hours, the intriguing thing here is, when I ran them on a 153Wh external battery at 6900mAh output, only one particular S number operated for 7.5 hours before the internal kicked in, (same one's I now use for the quakes) the next best was 3.5 hours.

I ran the test twice over a 2 month period in 2013, I was on a quest for battery longevity at the time, for Solar studies, and didn't want to buy a high end model for a 2 year monitoring project. I get a bit obsessive sometimes, and probably paid more for the used than a new one.

My resent purchase of 2 Dells was based on this, I may have assumed wrongly, lower battery consumption would relate to less noise and heat generation, thus avoiding VLF contamination.

I use the same 3 year old version of spectrum lab on all monitors, old and new, which shouldn't be an issue, there is a power difference though, the Toshiba's run on 16V, and the Dell's 19V. Not sure if all new laptops, net and note books run on 19V as standard, but I'm replying to you on a new Acer Chromebook 13, and a quick check shows this is also 19V.

I might be on the wrong trail here, but do you think voltage has any significance or effect on sound card sensitivity?, on the other hand, all the Toshiba's I tested are also 16V??. So why would one particular serial numbered model have twice the longevity of the others? its not a one off, I have 4, and they all run 7.5 hours!

Wish I could go into more detail with you, but until Duffy to Earth contact is re-established, we might be wearing out our distal phalanges for nothing .

Duffy;

[Roger Hunter]

Duffy;

This may be a stupid question but why run on batteries?

Roger

[Skywise]

(03-31-2015, 11:19 PM)Roger Hunter Wrote: Duffy;

This may be a stupid question but why run on batteries?

Roger

Not stupid at all. There's two aspects to this. One, mains voltage is surprisingly noisy. It's easier to run the laptops on batteries rather than invest in very expensive power filtering. By the time he bought a filter good enough for what he's doing, he could buy more laptops.

Second, the noise is even more problematic because of the frequencies he's measuring. Mains is either 60hz of 50hz depending where you are in the world. The problem is harmonics, multiples of the mains frequency. Without getting into AC signal theory, anything that is not a pure sine wave will have harmonics. And AC power is not a pure sine wave. So you get harmonics.

In broad generalities, VLF frequencies are below 30kHz. That would be the 500th harmonic of 60Hz. Typically you might get a few dozen harmonics. But it's also the other noises on the mains that cause problems. Someone turning on or off even a room light causes a spike or dip and the harmonics of that go off the charts.

Running on batteries eliminates that noise. And noise is exactly what he's trying to measure.

Brian