Guest guest Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 Hi , My Yahoo mail gets bounced often and I have to reset it to be able to receive mail again. I did miss this e-mail and am glad that you resent it. I wonder where this new information will lead us next. I have a modifed Icom 718 and have been using 11.780 Mhz without any excitement. Do you know if the Phanotron tube that was used is the quartz type, I think mine is Pyrex, Bill Cheb's 4 " ball. I have purchased a very large man made quartz cyrstal ingot 8 " x1 " it resonates @ 14.128 Khz, it will do this is the presence of a high voltage ignition coil a distances of up to 3 feet. Also with only about 20pp volts at one inch. The cyrstal becomes so excited that it buzzes around on my wooden work bench with no contact. The crystal is quite heavy around the weight of a roll of quarters. Thanks for the link to the new info. Arnold...... _______________________________________________ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 Hi , My Yahoo mail gets bounced often and I have to reset it to be able to receive mail again. I did miss this e-mail and am glad that you resent it. I wonder where this new information will lead us next. I have a modifed Icom 718 and have been using 11.780 Mhz without any excitement. Do you know if the Phanotron tube that was used is the quartz type, I think mine is Pyrex, Bill Cheb's 4 " ball. I have purchased a very large man made quartz cyrstal ingot 8 " x1 " it resonates @ 14.128 Khz, it will do this is the presence of a high voltage ignition coil a distances of up to 3 feet. Also with only about 20pp volts at one inch. The cyrstal becomes so excited that it buzzes around on my wooden work bench with no contact. The crystal is quite heavy around the weight of a roll of quarters. Thanks for the link to the new info. Arnold...... _______________________________________________ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 Thanks . Some interesting detective work. I do, however, believe the inferrence of using a triangle wave to approximate the " distorted " phanotron output in contact devices is questionable. It is well understood that triangle wave harmonics roll off faster than those of a squarewave. Hence they are substantially weaker. Getting back to the #4 machine, it seems plausible to me that the two independently tuned oscillators may have been intended to " beat " together, thereby producing a sum and difference frequency. The latter would be lower than either dial setting, even in the audio range, and thus might help explain the basis for frequencies in later models. It is also approximates the mechanism by which the microscope worked. Having said this, I am still not clear why Rife's pre-1934 frequency set includes frequencies for two dial settings and Hoyland's measurements only one. Can you shed any light on this transition? What exactly was Hoyland measuring? One device which I feel merits further examination is the Abrams Oscilloclast. This was likely Rife's original inspiration. It outputs a " damped " wave. This is achieved by feeding a squarewave into a resonant LC network. In addition to the input " frequency " it provides a superimposed high frequency ring, being of diminishing amplitude. Something like a spark gap discharge. In addition to this, due to the inherent distortion of a diminishing waveform, the higher frequency is really plural, being a group of frequencies neighboring the original. This is a relatively simple method involving only a signal generator and several passive components. Yet it provides for 1) a frequency of primary influence, 2) an RF carrier for improved penetration, and 3) a spread of frequencies in the latter to facilitate resonance. There is perhaps one reason why Rife did not continue with Abrams' apparently promising approach. During the early 1930's the airwaves were being carved up to service the emerging commercial broadcast industry. Damped waves and spark gap transmitters were outlawed, due to radio interferrence caused by their dispersed bandwidth. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 Thanks . Some interesting detective work. I do, however, believe the inferrence of using a triangle wave to approximate the " distorted " phanotron output in contact devices is questionable. It is well understood that triangle wave harmonics roll off faster than those of a squarewave. Hence they are substantially weaker. Getting back to the #4 machine, it seems plausible to me that the two independently tuned oscillators may have been intended to " beat " together, thereby producing a sum and difference frequency. The latter would be lower than either dial setting, even in the audio range, and thus might help explain the basis for frequencies in later models. It is also approximates the mechanism by which the microscope worked. Having said this, I am still not clear why Rife's pre-1934 frequency set includes frequencies for two dial settings and Hoyland's measurements only one. Can you shed any light on this transition? What exactly was Hoyland measuring? One device which I feel merits further examination is the Abrams Oscilloclast. This was likely Rife's original inspiration. It outputs a " damped " wave. This is achieved by feeding a squarewave into a resonant LC network. In addition to the input " frequency " it provides a superimposed high frequency ring, being of diminishing amplitude. Something like a spark gap discharge. In addition to this, due to the inherent distortion of a diminishing waveform, the higher frequency is really plural, being a group of frequencies neighboring the original. This is a relatively simple method involving only a signal generator and several passive components. Yet it provides for 1) a frequency of primary influence, 2) an RF carrier for improved penetration, and 3) a spread of frequencies in the latter to facilitate resonance. There is perhaps one reason why Rife did not continue with Abrams' apparently promising approach. During the early 1930's the airwaves were being carved up to service the emerging commercial broadcast industry. Damped waves and spark gap transmitters were outlawed, due to radio interferrence caused by their dispersed bandwidth. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2007 Report Share Posted July 14, 2007 >The phanotron output is not distorted, but is an almost >perfect triangle wave at the upper Rife frequencies; and that's >regardless of what you feed into it. It was illustrated in the article as harmonics introduced by the tube to a sinewave input. Technically, this is a distortion of the original signal, and IMO does not really qualify as a triangle wave. I find it hard to believe the tube puts out the same waveform, without regard to the input or loading. Therefore, to imply a triangle wave was contributory in some specific way seems illogical. If that was the case, why didn't Rife or his successors simply drive the tube with one? >A square wave or sine wave at 1604 >kHz will come out as a triangle wave. Since that's the case, it's not >unreasonable to try triangle waves in a pad machine, regardless of >whether the harmonics roll off faster than a square wave. It is a >closer simulation of what comes out of the phanotron. The emphasis in the article was that the triangle waveform added harmonics. No other possible benefit was mentioned. I therefore see no reason to assume the stronger harmonics of a squarewave would not work better. However, we all know a tube will not pass a squarewave intact either, so a distorted sinewave is an indicative outcome in any case. > > Getting back to the #4 machine, it seems plausible to me that the two > > independently tuned oscillators may have been intended to " beat " > > together, thereby producing a sum and difference frequency. The > > latter would be lower than either dial setting, even in the audio > > range, and thus might help explain the basis for frequencies in later > > models. > >That's assuming that both oscillators were used at the same time. If >you recall in the lab film demonstration, Rife was only using one of the >oscillators. The available information indicates that the primary >purpose of the two oscillators was to run two MORs simultaneously. Yes, and in the latter instance a beat frequency would have been generated. > Another possible purpose might have been to run a higher frequency with >the lower MORs, to make it easier to light the tube. That's speculation >on my part. Can be checked out with a replica tube. > > It is also approximates the mechanism by which the microscope worked. > >I assume you're referring to the idea of heterodyning two ultraviolet >wavelengths to get a visible wavelength. This is incorrect. I recall reading comments attributed to Crane that the microscope worked by heterodyning light. He also was reported to say that the frequency therapy machines worked on an analogous prinicple. If the latter is true, it could not be soley fluorescence as you seem to suggest. Can you elaborate on how you arrived at this process of elimination? > > Having said this, I am still not clear why Rife's pre-1934 frequency > > set includes frequencies for two dial settings and Hoyland's > > measurements only one. Can you shed any light on this transition? > > What exactly was Hoyland measuring? > >Rife didn't have two dial settings, but rather used two different types >of wave meters. One was calibrated in meters, and the other was >calibrated in cycles per second. You are saying the two sets of readings for each condition, from Rife's notes, do not represent dial settings. They are different because he used two different meters. That poses a few questions. Why are the CRF's predominantly related to the wavelength reading? Where are the examples of two frequency sets when both oscillators WERE used? Rife claimed this was necessary to successfully treat some conditions. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 > s has built a custom vacuum tube >amplifier that takes one or two signals from function generators and >drives the plasma tube directly. Further to this, the output impedance of most power vacuum tubes is too high, but a single 6AS7 will work. I can provide a circuit diagram if anyone is interested. A household fluorescent lamp was used in my tests. Preheating is advisable at lower frequencies. And aside from not have the capability with his equipment, >there would be no point in Rife driving the tube with a triangle wave if >it produces it anyway. None-the-less, generation of triangle waves was possible with the technology of the time. And if a triangle wave was deemed advantageous, it would be logical to use one instead of the plasma tube itself which imposes varying degrees of distortion depending on frequency. As I previously suggested, triangle waves were also likely rejected as a worthy waveform by Rife's successors. To sum it up, IMO it's not some new discovery. >That's certainly possible, but the plasma tube wont pass a square wave >at the higher RF frequencies. Yes, no RF squarewave for plasma, only pads. >Not necessarily. When s ran two separate frequencies into >each channel of his prototype machine, it gave a complex wave form, not >beat frequencies. Obviously then what his machine is doing is not simple mixing. Beats only work with sinewaves, these being singular frequencies. Of course, when you put them into a plasma tube they no longer appear as such. But it may have a desirable effect in terms of treatment. >The idea of heterodyning the light originates from Mark Gallert's book, > " New Light On Therapeutic Energies " . Rife never said anything along >this line. Apparently then comments about heterodyning attributed to Crane by Bedini are incorrect, or I have misinterpreted them. Can you please elaborate on your views in relation to the following? The relevant section is about 2/5th of the way down the page. http://www.icehouse.net/john34/rife.html >The only condition >that required two frequencies was Tuberculosis. If you wanted or needed >to run two frequencies simultaneously, you just looked up the dial >settings and set each oscillator to the frequency you wanted. I accept your explanation, as far as it goes. But why provide two oscillators if one is only used on one occasion, eg. TB? I am not sure this is well understood. What else, that is documented, was the second dial used for? Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 , I agree fully with you. Jim Bare > >That is certainly true, but I would think that being able to run Rife's >frequencies in a similar manner to the way he ran them would put you >much closer to the mark than the present state of the art. > >Regards, > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 >All four wires are attached to the plasma tube. It may be that two are >for the high voltage drive, or it may be that two each are for each of >the two signal generators. Which could indicate he was mixing two frequencies _in_ the tube. Or perhaps a higher ionization voltage for use with low frequencies. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 Nielsen wrote: >> All four wires are attached to the plasma tube. It may be that two are >> for the high voltage drive, or it may be that two each are for each of >> the two signal generators. > > Which could indicate he was mixing two frequencies _in_ the tube. Or > perhaps a higher ionization voltage for use with low frequencies. Yes, but in practice, this doesn't work well. Jim s tried it and said that, " The difference in voltage potentials between the tubes didn’t put enough through the plasma to do much more than keep it lit. In fact, it was hard to light without a strong, spiky signal and maximum voltage. " That's the beauty of actual experimentation with systems similar to what Rife was using; it helps you rule out configurations that don't work well. Whatever Rife was doing, he would had to have been doing something that was workable. If a configuration is unworkable today, it would have been even more so back then. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 Dave wrote: > Great to hear that Jim built a device without an output tank circuit - > he might post his schematics. So far all I've heard was that Rife's > original device was a pretty standard MOPA transmitter. I'd wonder how > Jim sampled the signal; most tube finals will give a sine wave, > distorted somewhat by the load (the tube in this case). If Jim's not > using a final with a tank circuit, I'd like to see the schematic of the > setup. Jim's work is still in the prototype stage. He's also very nervous about making it generally available, because of the lethal voltages involved. It's very simple. It's a two channel amp, with two 6JF6 tubes at the input to amplify the signal from the function generator(s), which drive the two 805 final tubes. He used the 805's because he had them on hand and I think he also had a filament transformer for them. The rest is resistors and capacitors, etc., but no inductors. As Jim said, you get broad band performance by leaving things out. I think any vacuum tube guy could design and build one, if they stop thinking like a radio guy. Also, you don't need to have two channels; you could have a single channel with just two tubes and make it even simpler. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 Dave wrote: > , if Jim has found a way to keep the plasma tube in a conducting > state with sine or triangular waves (Sounds somewhat like what Ian > MacLeod is doing in China) it's good news, and the schematics would be > very welcome! Perhaps the triangle wave is the rise and fall time of the plasma ionization? Or, maybe it has something to do with having it in the DC circuit? I don't recall if there was the same effect with a different configuration. One interesting thing he mentioned was that he had a vacuum tube fail on one of his Diathermy machines, the seal being compromised, and it gave the same triangle wave effect. So, it seems that it doesn't matter what gas it is, whether helium or air. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 all: Try: http://w5jgv.com/rife/pulse1/pulse1.htm and: http://w5jgv.com/rife/rifeupd1/nanorcvr.htm I would suspect the optical " doubling " is the energy being radiated as the plasma is being activated and then de-activated; both conditions release photons. Plus, if one measures the magnetic field with a very fast air-core coil you'll find that there is a delay between the optical and the magnetic output pulse. I don't recall now for sure, but I think the magnetic pulse came first - been awhile since I did this.. Ralph, do you recall the phasing between the optical pulse and the RF carrier? -Dave Ralph_yg wrote: >>Well, I have seen this happen previously in fluoro tubes. The >>doubling of frequency mentioned in the paper is interesting though. > > > Note that I have also observed the frequency doubling effect. Using my > fast optical detector, I observed that the carrier frequency of 27.120 > MHz was doubled to 54.24 MHz as optical pulses radiating from the tube. > > See: > > http://w5jgv.com\rife\pulse1\pulse1.htm > > for some early tests I ran on the tubes and the doubling at low > frequencies, and > > http://w5jgv.com\rife\rifeupd1\nanorcvr.htm > > for a picture of my " NanoMeter Receiver " optical detector. > > 73, > > Ralph W5JGV - WD2XSH/7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 > all: Try: > > http://w5jgv.com/rife/pulse1/pulse1.htm > and: > http://w5jgv.com/rife/rifeupd1/nanorcvr.htm > > I would suspect the optical " doubling " is the energy being > radiated as > the plasma is being activated and then de-activated; both conditions > release photons. Not IMHO. Here's a couple of lines snipped from my first web page reference, http://w5jgv.com/rife/pulse1/pulse1.htm above: " This picture shows the optical output from the Rife/Bare tube when it is connected to a 7.5 kV @ 60 mA luminous tube transformer. The horizontal scale in this picture is 2 milliseconds per division. Note that what is displayed here is NOT a 60 Hz waveform, (the North American standard power line frequency) but, is instead, a 120 Hz optical signal. This is so because the Rife/Bare tube is actually turning on and off with each half-cycle of the AC power from the transformer. " What's happening is that as the AC waveform (either 60 Hz or RF) passes through zero, the tube simply " goes out " and stops producing light. Hence, you get an optical frequency of twice the RF carrier frequency. Note that this effect does NOT double the modulating frequency. Note the oscilloscope picture of the tube's output at 60 HZ. It is a simple sine wave - nothing special about it, except that is at 120 Hz due to the doubling effect. Plus, if one measures the magnetic field > with a very > fast air-core coil you'll find that there is a delay between > the optical > and the magnetic output pulse. I don't recall now for sure, > but I think > the magnetic pulse came first - been awhile since I did this.. Yes there is a delay. On the same web page http://w5jgv.com/rife/pulse1/pulse1.htm, but a bit nearer the top of the page I have an oscilloscope picture comparing the RF voltage to the light output of the tube. 73, Ralph W5JGV - WD2XSH/7 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.6/900 - Release Date: 7/14/2007 3:36 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 >When it was lit, the output was just a simple mixture of the two >signals, as in channel A + channel B. You can get about the same effect >just by connecting the inputs together. I do not doubt the results of your experiments. But this deduction is not entirely true. Non-linear mixing, as occurs in plasma, has unique properties. Here is one paper dealing with it. The Priore machine is another example. http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai? & verb=getRecord & metadataPrefix=html & identifier=AD\ 0657774 It also notes the important distinction between ionization and electron current. When describing waveforms we need to account for both, and their dissimilar frequency dependence. It seems like some of us may be confusing the two. IOW ionization is a precursor of electron current, but they are not the same thing. A gas will only ionize and de-ionize so fast. As the frequency inceases ion levels tend to stabilize. Prior to this, it is largely responsible for observed distortions by the plasma tube. Certainly at the 60Hz recently cited by one researcher. Current, on the other hand, within gas already ionized, will cycle at 100's of MHz. BTW current reversal ocurs _twice_ each cycle. This is the basis for current (no pun) research into RF plasma antennae. Perhaps Rife determined empirically that ionization cycling at low frequencies was a detracting feature and used the second oscillator to either mitigate the effect or compensate the distorted waveform. >Plan B… The most simple one imaginable and I suspect a lot closer to >what Rife might have done. I connected the plasma tube in the DC circuit >between the plate voltage supply and the plate of one of the 805’s. >This worked much better. If I understand correctly, by doing this you are effectively DC biasing the plasma tube and hence imbalancing current reversal that contributes to second harmonics. It may not be an issue, but we should know it is happening. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 Nielsen wrote: > I do not doubt the results of your experiments. > But this deduction is not entirely true. > Non-linear mixing, as occurs in plasma, has > unique properties. Here is one paper dealing with > it. The Priore machine is another example. <snip> You're forgetting that most of the time Rife used just one frequency, so it's a moot point. Also, if it doesn't work practically in the setup being used, then that also makes it a moot point. Jim s has made a system similar to what Rife was using. The Priore system seems to be far more complex. > Perhaps Rife determined empirically that > ionization cycling at low frequencies was a > detracting feature and used the second oscillator > to either mitigate the effect or compensate the distorted waveform. Or perhaps he was just trying to get the tube to light? Let's not make this more complicated than we need to. Rife obviously didn't have the knowledge of plasma dynamics that exists today. He had an idea of transmitting frequencies in a similar fashion to x-rays, and set up a system to do that, but he couldn't have known all the physical principles occurring in the plasma. >> Plan B… The most simple one imaginable and I suspect a lot closer to >> what Rife might have done. I connected the plasma tube in the DC circuit >> between the plate voltage supply and the plate of one of the 805’s. >> This worked much better. > > If I understand correctly, by doing this you are > effectively DC biasing the plasma tube and hence > imbalancing current reversal that contributes to > second harmonics. It may not be an issue, but we should know it is happening. The only issue I'm really interested in knowing is whether it produces the MOR effect. Theories have not led to the replication of the MOR effect, so we have to just try things. If Jim succeeds in producing the MOR effect, then all the minutiae can be worked out after. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 Nielsen wrote: > I do not doubt the results of your experiments. > But this deduction is not entirely true. > Non-linear mixing, as occurs in plasma, has > unique properties. Here is one paper dealing with > it. The Priore machine is another example. <snip> You're forgetting that most of the time Rife used just one frequency, so it's a moot point. Also, if it doesn't work practically in the setup being used, then that also makes it a moot point. Jim s has made a system similar to what Rife was using. The Priore system seems to be far more complex. > Perhaps Rife determined empirically that > ionization cycling at low frequencies was a > detracting feature and used the second oscillator > to either mitigate the effect or compensate the distorted waveform. Or perhaps he was just trying to get the tube to light? Let's not make this more complicated than we need to. Rife obviously didn't have the knowledge of plasma dynamics that exists today. He had an idea of transmitting frequencies in a similar fashion to x-rays, and set up a system to do that, but he couldn't have known all the physical principles occurring in the plasma. >> Plan B… The most simple one imaginable and I suspect a lot closer to >> what Rife might have done. I connected the plasma tube in the DC circuit >> between the plate voltage supply and the plate of one of the 805’s. >> This worked much better. > > If I understand correctly, by doing this you are > effectively DC biasing the plasma tube and hence > imbalancing current reversal that contributes to > second harmonics. It may not be an issue, but we should know it is happening. The only issue I'm really interested in knowing is whether it produces the MOR effect. Theories have not led to the replication of the MOR effect, so we have to just try things. If Jim succeeds in producing the MOR effect, then all the minutiae can be worked out after. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2007 Report Share Posted July 17, 2007 There seems to differing views on whether or not the 1934 system used a single frequency or modulated carrier. While the simplicity of the former appeals, it also makes it hard for a technician to understand why MOR's cannot be reliably demonstrated now. Suitable RF signal generators and HV amps can be purchased eady made. Also, why were MHz carriers adopted in subsequent versions? The MOR concept itself for in vivo applications also raises questions. Imagine trying to resonate a speck in a bowl of jello, canned fruit, and other types of specks. Most of the energy is absorbed elsewhere. Additionally, the frequencies accepted as Rife's own are no where near the actual wavelength of a virus. Surely, he must have known this from the microsope work. Even then, equipment was available to go much higher. Why did he limit himself to the early MHz's, and insist the effect was due to resonance? This suggests to me something else must be involved. The original frequencies and plasma tube seem to be well known. Assuming a single frequency, the only other places to look are the amp and load matching network. How much do we know about these? I am particularly interested in the network. Is there any evidence one was used at all in 1934? It usually consists of a single capacitor and inductor. If so, and given it was not tuned for each frequency in a clinical setting, it is probable it had a purpose other than impedance matching. And a related question, are we certain the same machine generated a sine, and not square, wave as some have stated? If so, how? Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2007 Report Share Posted July 17, 2007 Nielsen wrote: > There seems to differing views on whether or not the 1934 system used > a single frequency or modulated carrier. While the simplicity of the > former appeals, it also makes it hard for a technician to understand > why MOR's cannot be reliably demonstrated now. Suitable RF signal > generators and HV amps can be purchased eady made. Also, why were MHz > carriers adopted in subsequent versions? You're forgetting that the Kennedy machines are radio receivers, which were being used as oscillators. They are not transmitters. They don't have modulation circuitry, or audio input. They are for removing audio off of a carrier, not putting it on. The only way to get a modulation of sorts is to feed one of them into the antenna input of the other. The waveform doesn't look like a modulation envelope. The main reason that the MOR effect can't be reliably demonstrated today is because virtually no one is trying to demonstrate it. I've been listening to excuses for years. If you know of suitable amps and generators that can run the original Rife frequency range, then I wholeheartedly encourage you to set up a system and start trying to demonstrate the effect. We need as many people as possible working on this. I'm constantly regretting that I never learned electronics and radio stuff. If I was a tech guy, I would build every configuration possible until something " worked " . The Beam Ray and later machines had a modulated carrier, most likely to conform to FCC regulations. > The MOR concept itself for in vivo applications also raises > questions. Imagine trying to resonate a speck in a bowl of jello, > canned fruit, and other types of specks. Most of the energy is > absorbed elsewhere. Additionally, the frequencies accepted as Rife's > own are no where near the actual wavelength of a virus. Surely, he > must have known this from the microsope work. Even then, equipment > was available to go much higher. Why did he limit himself to the > early MHz's, and insist the effect was due to resonance? > > This suggests to me something else must be involved. The original > frequencies and plasma tube seem to be well known. Assuming a single > frequency, the only other places to look are the amp and load > matching network. How much do we know about these? Something else may very well be involved. I have a bad intuitive feeling that it will turn out that the plasma tube is indispensable for the frequency range we're working in. It is most likely what allows us to get the resonance effect in the lower frequency range, instead of having to use a wavelength that is virus-sized. The reason I said it's a bad feeling is because it means that we wont be able to transfer the MOR effect from a plasma tube machine to a pad machine. I hope I'm wrong on this. > I am particularly interested in the network. Is there any evidence > one was used at all in 1934? It usually consists of a single > capacitor and inductor. If so, and given it was not tuned for each > frequency in a clinical setting, it is probable it had a purpose > other than impedance matching. I have seen no information regarding any tuning network on the old machine, and this is also proving to be a problem with Jim s' prototype. He said running the tube in the DC circuit lights the tube easily, but a lot of the intensity is just DC and doesn't contribute anything but heat and light. If you put DC blocking capacitors in, the efficiency is very low and he could hardly light the tube. This indicates that a tuning network of some sort may be needed to run this configuration in AC mode. Perhaps a hybrid setup combining properties of the #4 machine and the #3 machine is in order. Perhaps a custom made balanced antenna tuner that can tune the Rife frequency range will be needed? We need the tech guys to come up with practical solutions. > And a related question, are we certain the same machine generated a > sine, and not square, wave as some have stated? If so, how? The tests done with the Kennedy machines show that it puts out pure sine waves. This is in Jeff's paper. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2007 Report Share Posted July 17, 2007 WOW!! The exciting research presented in this paper brings new hope that a truly functional understanding of Rife's Beam Ray technology is much closer now. Huge compliments to Jeff and everyone involved! The frequency-doubling effect of the plasma tube has recently been described as resulting from the tube's unmodulated input sine wave traversing the null voltage axis. While thinking about what this means from the perspective of a targeted pathogen some questions come up... 1) Do the electric and magnetic fields emitted by a plasma tube have positive and negative polarities corresponding to the input signal, or do they simply vary in intensity like the emitted light level does? 2) It is valid to think that the intensity of a tube's emitted fields will have a waveform resembling the output from an unfiltered full- wave rectifier, ie the negative half of the sine wave is rotated 180 degrees around the axis (hence the frequency is doubled and the peak voltage/intensity range is halved)? Perhaps the time required to re- ionize the gas skews the waveform? 3) Based on what is now known about Rife's late 1930s equipment, is it possible that the sine wave input to the plasma tube was DC offset with enough voltage that the tube remained fully energized during use, hence the tube output the same frequency that was input to it (no voltage doubling)? 4) If an MOR of X hertz is the frequency being input to Rife's plasma tube, and the tube outputs the frequency 2X, then might a pad device or amplitude-modulated-carrier device need to output a frequency of 2X to achieve comparable effects? If duplicating the functionality and frequencies of Rife's late 1930s equipment is what is needed in order to achieve comparable results or better, then we may need to construct walk-in Faraday cages large enough to contain a person and machine so as to not run afoul of the FCC. Looking ahead, can anyone offer suggestions for low cost methods of constructing Faraday cages? Perhaps inexpensive chicken wire would be adequate to contain MOR frequencies and their harmonics? Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2007 Report Share Posted July 17, 2007 , There are two ways to approach the concept of resonance. One might be called the reductionist method, where a particular molecule,organelle, or other part of a cell is affected by the wave. This is where most of the published literature on EM fields lies. There are many different manners in which EM fields interact with cells. Electro conformational coupling, transport mechanisms, plasma membranes, up and down regulation of genes, and so on. The second, might be called the coherent method , where the organism as a whole is affected by the frequency. Dr. Mae Wan Ho has a great web site about organisms as coherent liquid crystals. Crystals of course can be made to resonantly vibrate. Something to consider is that if the wave is converted into a compressional mode within the body, it has a conduction speed of about 1550 M/Sec.. One can work out the wave length of a particular frequency from that. At Mhz levels, the wavelengths are very short Dr.Rife was looking for an immediate observable effect on the micro organism. This is only one way of proving effectiveness!!! Trying to duplicate Rife's technique is an admirable goal,and much can be learned once this has been accomplished. But this is not the only method that can be used to show physiologic response to frequencies ! The microscope method is cheap and simple - a very effective method without doubt.A lot of the effects that occur from EM fields are not easily visible, and occur at the molecular level. For instance, use of various fluorescent markers and such can be used to demonstrate effectiveness . With money and research, there are at least a good dozen ways to show a detrimental effect on infectious organisms. No money exists for such research, even though the supporting science for frequency treatment is overwhelming. I posted a couple of patents a few days ago from the late 1920's and early 1930's that discuss the ability to kill micro organisms using specific frequencies delivered by RF transmitters. The patents tell exactly how to do this. Jim Bare >The MOR concept itself for in vivo applications also raises >questions. Imagine trying to resonate a speck in a bowl of jello, >canned fruit, and other types of specks. Most of the energy is >absorbed elsewhere. Additionally, the frequencies accepted as Rife's >own are no where near the actual wavelength of a virus. Surely, he >must have known this from the microsope work. Even then, equipment >was available to go much higher. Why did he limit himself to the >early MHz's, and insist the effect was due to resonance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2007 Report Share Posted July 17, 2007 , There are two ways to approach the concept of resonance. One might be called the reductionist method, where a particular molecule,organelle, or other part of a cell is affected by the wave. This is where most of the published literature on EM fields lies. There are many different manners in which EM fields interact with cells. Electro conformational coupling, transport mechanisms, plasma membranes, up and down regulation of genes, and so on. The second, might be called the coherent method , where the organism as a whole is affected by the frequency. Dr. Mae Wan Ho has a great web site about organisms as coherent liquid crystals. Crystals of course can be made to resonantly vibrate. Something to consider is that if the wave is converted into a compressional mode within the body, it has a conduction speed of about 1550 M/Sec.. One can work out the wave length of a particular frequency from that. At Mhz levels, the wavelengths are very short Dr.Rife was looking for an immediate observable effect on the micro organism. This is only one way of proving effectiveness!!! Trying to duplicate Rife's technique is an admirable goal,and much can be learned once this has been accomplished. But this is not the only method that can be used to show physiologic response to frequencies ! The microscope method is cheap and simple - a very effective method without doubt.A lot of the effects that occur from EM fields are not easily visible, and occur at the molecular level. For instance, use of various fluorescent markers and such can be used to demonstrate effectiveness . With money and research, there are at least a good dozen ways to show a detrimental effect on infectious organisms. No money exists for such research, even though the supporting science for frequency treatment is overwhelming. I posted a couple of patents a few days ago from the late 1920's and early 1930's that discuss the ability to kill micro organisms using specific frequencies delivered by RF transmitters. The patents tell exactly how to do this. Jim Bare >The MOR concept itself for in vivo applications also raises >questions. Imagine trying to resonate a speck in a bowl of jello, >canned fruit, and other types of specks. Most of the energy is >absorbed elsewhere. Additionally, the frequencies accepted as Rife's >own are no where near the actual wavelength of a virus. Surely, he >must have known this from the microsope work. Even then, equipment >was available to go much higher. Why did he limit himself to the >early MHz's, and insist the effect was due to resonance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 >The frequency-doubling effect of the plasma tube has recently been >described as resulting from the tube's unmodulated input sine wave >traversing the null voltage axis. The doubling of the frequency is due to current reversal, eg. once at the peak of the waveform and once at the trough, not ionization which relates to the voltage of the applied signal. Ionization and electron current are two different phenomena occuring simultaneously within the plasma. It seems some of us are still thinking of them as one. At the frequencies used by Rife there is no effective DE-ionization, and hence no cycling of this function. IOW ionization is like a mechanical relay. It can only operate up to a certain speed. After that, it stays " on " and there is no appreciable light modulation. Any therapeutic effect would necessarily be due to current. Its reversal generates an electrical shock wave. Apart from frequency, this mode of propagation may have some critical bearing. I suspect it has a strong longitudinal component, similar to acoustic waves. This might answer your other questions. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 >There are two ways to approach the concept of resonance. One might be >called the reductionist method, where a particular molecule,organelle, or >other part of a cell is affected by the wave. This is where most of the >published literature on EM fields lies. Are you acquainted with Self Field Theory? The involvement of bio-photons could have a link with plasma tube emissions. http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050905/handlight_print.html An excerpt: " Warm temperatures increased the release of photons, as did the introduction of oxygen. Rubbing mineral oil over the hands also heightened light levels. " Hmm ... ozone and light? Massage and sauna before Rifing anyone? >Something to consider is that if the wave is converted into a compressional >mode within the body, it has a conduction speed of about 1550 M/Sec.. One >can work out the wave length of a particular frequency from that. At Mhz >levels, the wavelengths are very short. My understanding is that a compressional wave resembles an acoustic wave. It is affected by intervening media, and hence could be a rationale for why frequencies lower than mechanical resonance work. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 >There are two ways to approach the concept of resonance. One might be >called the reductionist method, where a particular molecule,organelle, or >other part of a cell is affected by the wave. This is where most of the >published literature on EM fields lies. Are you acquainted with Self Field Theory? The involvement of bio-photons could have a link with plasma tube emissions. http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050905/handlight_print.html An excerpt: " Warm temperatures increased the release of photons, as did the introduction of oxygen. Rubbing mineral oil over the hands also heightened light levels. " Hmm ... ozone and light? Massage and sauna before Rifing anyone? >Something to consider is that if the wave is converted into a compressional >mode within the body, it has a conduction speed of about 1550 M/Sec.. One >can work out the wave length of a particular frequency from that. At Mhz >levels, the wavelengths are very short. My understanding is that a compressional wave resembles an acoustic wave. It is affected by intervening media, and hence could be a rationale for why frequencies lower than mechanical resonance work. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2007 Report Share Posted July 18, 2007 >If I was a tech guy, I would build every configuration >possible until something " worked " . Perhaps us " tech guys " are trying to nail things down a bit first. Why spend time and money up blind alleys? With regard to an existing suitable amp, it could be something like this. Notice in 2002 they are still using vacuum tubes for the output. It drives pads. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel5/7805/21449/00994679.pdf >The Beam Ray and later machines had a modulated carrier, most likely to >conform to FCC regulations. Or to compensate for the lower applied frequencies, maybe. >... the plasma tube is indispensable for >the frequency range we're working in. It is most likely what allows us >to get the resonance effect in the lower frequency range, instead of >having to use a wavelength that is virus-sized. As you previously mentioned, it is important to spectrum analyze the waveform, both across the plasma tube and at distance. And one would like to be absolutely sure Rife's own Kennedy receivers were not internally modified, or external components added. I look forward to Jim s' results. >I have seen no information regarding any tuning network on the old >machine, and this is also proving to be a problem with Jim s' >prototype. (snip) This >indicates that a tuning network of some sort may be needed to run this >configuration in AC mode. But doesn't this tend to suggest Rife _did_ use a network? Where might it be hiding? See my comment on damped waves below. >Perhaps a hybrid setup combining properties >of the #4 machine and the #3 machine is in order. Perhaps a custom made >balanced antenna tuner that can tune the Rife frequency range will be >needed? We need the tech guys to come up with practical solutions. A conventional fixed network covering then entire 200KHz to 2MHz is not viable. And I see no LC tuning dials on the control panel of any of Rife's commercial machines. >The tests done with the Kennedy machines show that it puts out pure sine >waves. This is in Jeff's paper. This could easily be converted to a squarewave by over-driving the amplifier. My line of thinking is that an external tank circuit, with fixed values, could then produce a damped waveform similar to the Oscilloclast. This, in effect, adds a dispersed RF carrier to the squarewave frequency without the appearence of conventional modulation hardware. Physically, it would look like an LC matching network but function differently. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.