Re: differences between the BCX ultra and GB-4000

[Guest guest]

For a complete analysis and the lowest possible price, please give Ron Strauss a

call at (northern California). He's working with me on the same

issue. Mention that Kent sent you.

GB

>

> These are the two machines that I have narrowed my purchase

> down to,can anyone tell me of the two which one is the more

> efficient and versatile.Also,is one more powerful than the other

> and which would combat a virus effectively(not HIV).

>

[Guest guest]

i won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4 inches deep

and the preset Fqs are we ll done. Though i hear the gb4000 can run like 8 fqs

at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily portable has a sweep

feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens etc.. I am happy with my bcx but

having a scan function and 8 fqs at one time on the gb4000 is pretty sweet. the

bcx is like $2600 or less.

Brad

>

> These are the two machines that I have narrowed my purchase

> down to,can anyone tell me of the two which one is the more

> efficient and versatile.Also,is one more powerful than the other

> and which would combat a virus effectively(not HIV).

>

[Guest guest]

> i won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4 inches

deep and the preset Fqs are we ll done. Though i hear the gb4000 can run

like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily portable

has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens etc.. I am happy

with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one time on the gb4000

is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

>

> Brad

________

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a " stew-pot " of many, many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

> i won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4 inches

deep and the preset Fqs are we ll done. Though i hear the gb4000 can run

like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily portable

has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens etc.. I am happy

with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one time on the gb4000

is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

>

> Brad

________

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a " stew-pot " of many, many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

> i won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4 inches

deep and the preset Fqs are we ll done. Though i hear the gb4000 can run

like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily portable

has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens etc.. I am happy

with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one time on the gb4000

is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

>

> Brad

________

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a " stew-pot " of many, many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work best.

Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

the signals that it wasn't really productive.

- engineer Dave

> I won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4

> inches deep and the preset Fqs are well done. Though I hear the

gb4000 can run

> like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily

> portable has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens etc.. I

> am happy with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one time

on the

> gb4000 is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

> >

> > Brad

> ________

>

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a " stew-pot " of many, many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work best.

Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

the signals that it wasn't really productive.

- engineer Dave

> I won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4

> inches deep and the preset Fqs are well done. Though I hear the

gb4000 can run

> like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily

> portable has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens etc.. I

> am happy with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one time

on the

> gb4000 is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

> >

> > Brad

> ________

>

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a " stew-pot " of many, many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work best.

Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

the signals that it wasn't really productive.

- engineer Dave

> I won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4

> inches deep and the preset Fqs are well done. Though I hear the

gb4000 can run

> like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily

> portable has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens etc.. I

> am happy with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one time

on the

> gb4000 is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

> >

> > Brad

> ________

>

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a " stew-pot " of many, many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

> All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

> commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work best.

> Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

> the signals that it wasn't really productive.

> - engineer Dave

Dave, could you clarify if that was in vitro or in vivo experiments?

Thanks! Char

[Guest guest]

> All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

> commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work best.

> Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

> the signals that it wasn't really productive.

> - engineer Dave

Dave, could you clarify if that was in vitro or in vivo experiments?

Thanks! Char

[Guest guest]

> All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

> commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work best.

> Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

> the signals that it wasn't really productive.

> - engineer Dave

Dave, could you clarify if that was in vitro or in vivo experiments?

Thanks! Char

[Guest guest]

Unknown, Char..

-Dave

> > All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

> > commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work

best.

>

> > Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power

loss in

>

> > the signals that it wasn't really productive.

> > - engineer Dave

>

>

> Dave, could you clarify if that was in vitro or in vivo experiments?

> Thanks! Char

>

[Guest guest]

Unknown, Char..

-Dave

> > All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

> > commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work

best.

>

> > Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power

loss in

>

> > the signals that it wasn't really productive.

> > - engineer Dave

>

>

> Dave, could you clarify if that was in vitro or in vivo experiments?

> Thanks! Char

>

[Guest guest]

Unknown, Char..

-Dave

> > All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological experiments

> > commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work

best.

>

> > Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power

loss in

>

> > the signals that it wasn't really productive.

> > - engineer Dave

>

>

> Dave, could you clarify if that was in vitro or in vivo experiments?

> Thanks! Char

>

[Guest guest]

Dave,

how about the wave interference?

Dave Felt said the following on 21.08.2009 21:00:

All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological

experiments

commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work

best.

Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

the signals that it wasn't really productive.

- engineer Dave

On 8/21/2009 10:45:06 AM, cb (soundtreewindstream (DOT) net)

wrote:

> I won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4

> inches deep and the preset Fqs are well done. Though I hear the

gb4000 can run

> like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily

> portable has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens

etc.. I

> am happy with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one

time

on the

> gb4000 is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

> >

> > Brad

> ________

>

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running

multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each

frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running

multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of

the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional

sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of

which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is

easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a "stew-pot" of many,

many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is

useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple

frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic

behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power

levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

Dave,

how about the wave interference?

Dave Felt said the following on 21.08.2009 21:00:

All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological

experiments

commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work

best.

Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

the signals that it wasn't really productive.

- engineer Dave

On 8/21/2009 10:45:06 AM, cb (soundtreewindstream (DOT) net)

wrote:

> I won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4

> inches deep and the preset Fqs are well done. Though I hear the

gb4000 can run

> like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily

> portable has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens

etc.. I

> am happy with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one

time

on the

> gb4000 is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

> >

> > Brad

> ________

>

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running

multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each

frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running

multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of

the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional

sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of

which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is

easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a "stew-pot" of many,

many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is

useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple

frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic

behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power

levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

Dave,

how about the wave interference?

Dave Felt said the following on 21.08.2009 21:00:

All, Just a FYI, one of the fellows who does biological

experiments

commented that a maximum of 4 frequencies at a time seemed to work

best.

Going to 6 or 8 frequencies at a time resulted in so much power loss in

the signals that it wasn't really productive.

- engineer Dave

On 8/21/2009 10:45:06 AM, cb (soundtreewindstream (DOT) net)

wrote:

> I won a bcx ultra and am happy with it. the plasma tubes penetate 4

> inches deep and the preset Fqs are well done. Though I hear the

gb4000 can run

> like 8 fqs at one time which saves alot of time. the bcx is easily

> portable has a sweep feature and some other attahcemnts LED pens

etc.. I

> am happy with my bcx but having a scan function and 8 fqs at one

time

on the

> gb4000 is pretty sweet. the bcx is like $2600 or less.

> >

> > Brad

> ________

>

Hi Brad,

There's a discussion been going on at the Rife forum about running

multiple

frequencies at one time. While it is very convenient, it also has a

possible down side to it, that of a reduced power level for each

frequency.

I'll copy here most of what I posted at the forum about this. Char

***************

Last week I spoke with several electrical engineers about running

multiple

frequencies. They were in complete agreement about power....To give

examples:

- running one frequency through a wire, gives that number 100% of the

available power;

- running two frequencies through a wire, gives each number 50% of the

available power;

- running four frequencies through a wire, gives each number 25% of the

available power;

- running eight frequencies through a wire, gives each number 12.5% of

the

available power.

In addition to that, multiple numbers will create mixing - additional

sum

and difference frequencies created from the original numbers. All of

which

suck from the total available power in some way. After a while it is

easy to

see that using many frequencies tends to create a "stew-pot" of many,

many

numbers all (or many) of which could have low power. And at some point,

there is a realistic concern as to what power level is needed to even

deliver any one number into the tissues and cells in a way that is

useful.

I realize some people are reporting good results using multiple

frequencies,

but until we can figure out why that might be happening, the logic

behind

using single numbers is fairly strong, especially as regards power

levels.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

Hello Char,

Yes the frequencies ride on the carrier frequency (AM modulation)the same as the

1950s AZ-58.

> > >

> > > If the device has an RF carrier frequency, is that generated separately

> from

> > > the other frequencies you are referring to? So that you could run the

> > > carrier frequency at the same time as a single frequency and the single

> > > frequency would run at 100% power?

> > >

> > > Randy

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Char,

Yes the frequencies ride on the carrier frequency (AM modulation)the same as the

1950s AZ-58.

> > >

> > > If the device has an RF carrier frequency, is that generated separately

> from

> > > the other frequencies you are referring to? So that you could run the

> > > carrier frequency at the same time as a single frequency and the single

> > > frequency would run at 100% power?

> > >

> > > Randy

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Lawrence,

Yes you can run up to 8 frequencies in audio mode up to 40,000 hertz. It makes

no difference which mode you use (RF or audio) the frequencies run

simultaneously (all at the same time). The power will vary depending on the

number of frequencies run. The average power output before your muscles will

begin to contract in audio mode is about one fifth of a watt. It does not matter

what type of instrument you use in audio mode this will happen. In RF mode

muscle contraction does not take place so the power output can be much greater.

In RF mode you have a maximum power output of about 2 watts so the power of each

frequency depends on the number you run. Even if you run 8 frequencies at the

same time you will have over one fifth of a watt for each frequency. We did this

so that no matter how many frequencies you run they would all have sufficient

power.

The amplifier is a Class A AM amplifier. With the use of the amplifier the power

level of each frequency can be from over 1 watt to about 10 watts of power

depending on how many frequencies you run.

Jeff

> > > >

> > > > If the device has an RF carrier frequency, is that generated

separately

> > from

> > > > the other frequencies you are referring to? So that you could run the

> > > > carrier frequency at the same time as a single frequency and the

single

> > > > frequency would run at 100% power?

> > > >

> > > > Randy

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Lawrence,

Yes you can run up to 8 frequencies in audio mode up to 40,000 hertz. It makes

no difference which mode you use (RF or audio) the frequencies run

simultaneously (all at the same time). The power will vary depending on the

number of frequencies run. The average power output before your muscles will

begin to contract in audio mode is about one fifth of a watt. It does not matter

what type of instrument you use in audio mode this will happen. In RF mode

muscle contraction does not take place so the power output can be much greater.

In RF mode you have a maximum power output of about 2 watts so the power of each

frequency depends on the number you run. Even if you run 8 frequencies at the

same time you will have over one fifth of a watt for each frequency. We did this

so that no matter how many frequencies you run they would all have sufficient

power.

The amplifier is a Class A AM amplifier. With the use of the amplifier the power

level of each frequency can be from over 1 watt to about 10 watts of power

depending on how many frequencies you run.

Jeff

> > > >

> > > > If the device has an RF carrier frequency, is that generated

separately

> > from

> > > > the other frequencies you are referring to? So that you could run the

> > > > carrier frequency at the same time as a single frequency and the

single

> > > > frequency would run at 100% power?

> > > >

> > > > Randy

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Lawrence,

Yes you can run up to 8 frequencies in audio mode up to 40,000 hertz. It makes

no difference which mode you use (RF or audio) the frequencies run

simultaneously (all at the same time). The power will vary depending on the

number of frequencies run. The average power output before your muscles will

begin to contract in audio mode is about one fifth of a watt. It does not matter

what type of instrument you use in audio mode this will happen. In RF mode

muscle contraction does not take place so the power output can be much greater.

In RF mode you have a maximum power output of about 2 watts so the power of each

frequency depends on the number you run. Even if you run 8 frequencies at the

same time you will have over one fifth of a watt for each frequency. We did this

so that no matter how many frequencies you run they would all have sufficient

power.

The amplifier is a Class A AM amplifier. With the use of the amplifier the power

level of each frequency can be from over 1 watt to about 10 watts of power

depending on how many frequencies you run.

Jeff

> > > >

> > > > If the device has an RF carrier frequency, is that generated

separately

> > from

> > > > the other frequencies you are referring to? So that you could run the

> > > > carrier frequency at the same time as a single frequency and the

single

> > > > frequency would run at 100% power?

> > > >

> > > > Randy

> >

>