Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 --- " Dr. Whiting " wrote: > Has anyone had any experience in testing Rife > frequencies on bacterial cultures? It occurred to > me that various bacteria can be grown on various > culture material (e.g., blood or chocolate agar). > Once cultured, the various bacteria can be > identified by their appearance and Rife frequencies > can be tested against disc-impregnated antibiotics > in separate petri dishes for susceptibility. > Standard laboratory procedures would be necessary to > accomplish this bacterial culturing procedure since > it requires access to culturing material, incubation > equipment and filter paper antibiotic discs. > Plasma-type and pad-type Rife equipment could be > tested against the antibiotic sensitivity to the > various bacteria. This seems to me to be a possible > way of evaluating Rife frequencies ability to kill > various bacteria. Your thoughts? > > Dr. Bob You're absolutely right Bob. Standard laboratory procedures are what is needed to test frequencies. All that's really needed is someone with the training and resources to do it. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Dr. Bob, With todays instruments it is going to be a lot simpler to take advantage of the " Bioelectric Effect " between pulsed EM fields and antibiotics. No one has run tests yet to show some sort of frequency response window to this effect. I suspect such a window exists and will vary based upon the organism, the concentration of the antibiotic,the field strength, and application time. The bioelectric effect is when one combines antibiotics with pulsed EM fields, the concentration of antibiotics necessary to kill the test culture is significantly diminished. Jim Bare >Has anyone had any experience in testing Rife frequencies on >bacterial cultures? It occurred to me that various bacteria can be >grown on various culture material (e.g., blood or chocolate agar). >Once cultured, the various bacteria can be identified by their >appearance and Rife frequencies can be tested against >disc-impregnated antibiotics in separate petri dishes for >susceptibility. Standard laboratory procedures would be necessary to >accomplish this bacterial culturing procedure since it requires >access to culturing material, incubation equipment and filter paper >antibiotic discs. Plasma-type and pad-type Rife equipment could be >tested against the antibiotic sensitivity to the various bacteria. >This seems to me to be a possible way of evaluating Rife frequencies >ability to kill various bacteria. Your thoughts? > >Dr. Bob > >--------------------------------- >You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of >Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Dr. Bob.. I have hundreds of hours of this, all unsuccessful in hampering the growth of one of the safe strains of e.coli. Three tests out of perhaps a hundred DID show a marked reduction in the growth rate, but were not reproducible using the same frequencies and times and conditions (and unknown why..) Having said that, I am assured by three different people that they have killed e.coli in culture with Plasma Lamp emissions. One of those was kind enough to send me the protocol used, and I hope to redo those tests this summer, but with a microscope slide and videocamera rather than measuring the culture densities, which take a huge amount of time. If the correct protocol is found, I'll redo the cell culture density experiments. If you'd like to email me privately, we can discuss this more.. Dave Felt DFE Research Dr. Whiting wrote: > Has anyone had any experience in testing Rife frequencies on bacterial cultures? It occurred to me that various bacteria can be grown on various culture material (e.g., blood or chocolate agar). Once cultured, the various bacteria can be identified by their appearance and Rife frequencies can be tested against disc-impregnated antibiotics in separate petri dishes for susceptibility. Standard laboratory procedures would be necessary to accomplish this bacterial culturing procedure since it requires access to culturing material, incubation equipment and filter paper antibiotic discs. Plasma-type and pad-type Rife equipment could be tested against the antibiotic sensitivity to the various bacteria. This seems to me to be a possible way of evaluating Rife frequencies ability to kill various bacteria. Your thoughts? > > Dr. Bob > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 >You're absolutely right Bob. Standard laboratory >procedures are what is needed to test frequencies. All >that's really needed is someone with the training and >resources to do it. So ... if someone were to do the long-awaited standardized tests, what equipment specs, signal makeup, and bacteria strain would have the best chance of producing a result? To my mind, it needs to be frequency specifc to be vaild. That means other frequencies of similar intensity are also demonstrated not to work. Anyone can zap a petri dish with DC. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Nielsen wrote: > So ... if someone were to do the long-awaited standardized tests, > what equipment specs, signal makeup, and bacteria strain would have > the best chance of producing a result? To my mind, it needs to be > frequency specifc to be vaild. That means other frequencies of > similar intensity are also demonstrated not to work. Anyone can zap a > petri dish with DC. > > Nielsen > > DC is not " other frequencies " and would be hard to induce upon a petri dish without some physical connection, eh? I'm not so sure it needs to be proven that other frequencies do not work. After all, if you use the analogy of breaking a wine glass by vibrating hard enough it at its resonant frequency, wouldn't the wine glass still break at an off-resonant frequency if the intensity was high enough? Does an earthquake have to vibrate a building at its resonant frequency in order to make it crumble? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Hi: Dave. The fastest way to do this is with bacterial dip slides, but they are around 3 bucks a test. This way you do not have to worry about sterile agar, or trying to count colonies under a microscope. But the bacteria you are working with needs to be catalyse positive for the indicator on the dip slide to work. I also often wonder if some of the Rife effect under the microscope or in dishes,or even skin conditions was not from pulsed UV if the raytube was close to the sample. This was quite possible since Rife used quartz for the raytube,slides and dishes. Pulsed UV can have a stronger effect than steady state UV. In one of the letters I think from Milbank they were worried that they just may be getting a surface killing effect, at least at one point in time. Beamray/Old Mike > > Has anyone had any experience in testing Rife frequencies on bacterial cultures? It occurred to me that various bacteria can be grown on various culture material (e.g., blood or chocolate agar). Once cultured, the various bacteria can be identified by their appearance and Rife frequencies can be tested against disc- impregnated antibiotics in separate petri dishes for susceptibility. Standard laboratory procedures would be necessary to accomplish this bacterial culturing procedure since it requires access to culturing material, incubation equipment and filter paper antibiotic discs. Plasma-type and pad-type Rife equipment could be tested against the antibiotic sensitivity to the various bacteria. This seems to me to be a possible way of evaluating Rife frequencies ability to kill various bacteria. Your thoughts? > > > > Dr. Bob > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Mike, that's why I was using e.coli, which are very motile and visible. Make a culture with luria broth, innoculate it from a slant tube, incubate till a colony is visible (cloudy), place a drop on a slide with cover plate (gads, I don't know where my slides or covers are..), pop under the microscope and image the bacteria at a minimum of 400x (600x better), turn on the plasma lamp, select what frequencies are to be used, and watch and see. One researcher said somewhere between 20khz and 30 Khz just killed them dead (So keep the raw culture far away!) Not planning to use any indicator or stain. I don't use quartz, generally, so UV wuldn't be an issue, BUT, it's a good point, so perhaps the Plasma Lamp should be blocked by paper to cut the UV. Easy to try both ways.. Thanks, Dave beamray53 wrote: > Hi: Dave. The fastest way to do this is with bacterial dip slides, > but they are around 3 bucks a test. This way you do not have to > worry about sterile agar, or trying to count colonies under a > microscope. But the bacteria you are working with needs to > be catalyse positive for the indicator on the dip slide to work. > > I also often wonder if some of the Rife effect under the microscope > or in dishes,or even skin conditions was not from pulsed UV if the > raytube was close to the sample. This was quite possible since Rife > used quartz for the raytube,slides and dishes. Pulsed UV can have a > stronger effect than steady state UV. > In one of the letters I think from Milbank > they were worried that they just may be getting a > surface killing effect, at least at one point in time. > Beamray/Old Mike > > >>> Has anyone had any experience in testing Rife frequencies on > bacterial cultures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Stan Truman found that two Plamsa Lamp machines running a bit out of phase was VERY effective; I don't know how the effectiveness was determined, but I don't believe he was doing bacterial tests. -Dave > Dave: I do not believe that raytubes made from normal glass > will pass UV, but the quartz that Rife used would. > If you get to experiment again, you might want to try using two > frequencies one variable, and if you have the equipment two different > RF frequencies with one variable. Difference/beat/Tartini tones > frequencies may work differently than a single frequency. > Beamray/Old Mike > > > > > > Mike, > that's why I was using e.coli, which are very motile and > visible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2008 Report Share Posted April 6, 2008 >We know that the frequencies in the lab >notes are incorrect because his equipment was >incapable of generating frequencies as high as some of >those listed. You say " know " , but IMO this is based upon three unverified assumptions, being that: 1) no equipment other than the Kennedy's were used, 2) they were not modified in some way, and 3) the frequencies were not produced by an auxilliary means, such as super-regenerative oscillation. >The later frequency list that was made >from the older machine to transfer to the newer #4 >machine also confirms this. The reason that one of >the figures is in " wavelength " is because the >wavemeter that he used to make the measurement was >calibrated in meters. So then why was one frequency given in Hz and the other in metres? That's not consistent with your explanation. >It's that simple. The use of a >wavemeter also explains the higher harmonics that he >picked up from the plasma tube. Hoyland's frequency list may indeed be correct. But you are presuming this is an error on Rife's part. How do we know he was not consciously applying the higher harmonics he measured? Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 >The evidence indicates that the two frequencies >involved are the MOR, and the fixed audio pulsing >frequency. I mentioned that in my post. Two, three, audio, fixed? Maybe. >This idea of heterodyning two frequencies of light in >the microscope is oft repeated without any supporting >evidence, or knowledge of where the idea originates. According to my study, it relates to the activity of second, or monochromatic, beam of light admitted to the specimen. Optical heterodyning is now a well established principle. >This subject has been covered before. It may be one >explanation, but we don't see the spark diathermy >machine in the photo with the four wires. Sure, but you don't see Rife either, or alot of other things. Rather we could ask, _why_ was there a diathermy machine in his lab at all? Such instruments are known to be capable of producing a range of monopolar and bipolar waveforms, including damped sinusoidals. >Where did you read this? Rife said he found his >frequencies by " hunt and try " method, not any >calculations. To an extent. But, are you saying he knew nothing about resonant wavelengths. That's a " predictive calculation " . My point was that he is reported to have been surprised at how low the frequencies were. Anyone operating on the resonance premise would be. >The gating frequency that produced the damped wave in >the lab film was an audio frequency, so it wouldn't >function as a carrier. I didn't say it was. The grid modulates the plate frequency. The latter would be the carrier. >I think you're reading a little too much into this. >My understanding is that Rife wound some of his coils >in his very earliest research, before he moved on to >the Kennedy equipment. This is conjectural. How do you know he didn't keep winding them? >Yes, but if guys like Jim s and Jeff Garff had >this attitude, we wouldn't have our present knowledge >and understanding. The " attitude " is healthy skepticism. Presumably, that is why they challenged previous interpretations of the second Hartley in the Gruner circuit. That's the way science works. >A purely intellectual analysis is >not enough; different configurations need to be >actually tried out to see the real-world results. As >an example, the audio circuit in the Gruner/Beam Ray >machine did not give any indication that it was >anything other than a simple audio circuit. Only >after Jim s actually built and tested it was the >spike wave revealed. Agreed, and that's great. Perhaps this spike was intended to substitute for the diathermy machine. >(snip) We need to follow the clues >that we have and test them out, not resign with the >attitude that it's " overly optimistic " , based on >purely intellectual analysis. , it seems you are reading things into my posts, and then responding with a fixed set of comfortable assumptions. Most of the technical points I raised go addressed. For example, the question of the low grid voltages. I don't really feel this is constructive. If you would like to discuss anything, please provide additional references or factual data. Otherwise, we just have a difference of interpretation. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 --- Nielsen wrote: > > >We know that the frequencies in the lab > >notes are incorrect because his equipment was > >incapable of generating frequencies as high as some > of > >those listed. > > You say " know " , but IMO this is based upon three > unverified > assumptions, being that: 1) no equipment other than > the Kennedy's > were used, 2) they were not modified in some way, > and 3) the > frequencies were not produced by an auxilliary > means, such as > super-regenerative oscillation. I think that's a fundamental difference between you and I. I try to proceed by the light of what _is known_, not what isn't known. We do have indication that Rife used equipment other than the Kennedy machines before he got those, but all the evidence shows that the Kennedy machines were what he used up until the building of the #4 machine in 1935. If you think or suspect otherwise, the burden of proof rests on you. What evidence do you have that gives any indication that he used equipment other than the Kennedy machines? And what would be the purpose of modifying them? The frequency list that Hoyland measured doesn't show any frequency higher than what the Kennedy machines were already capable of generating, so there would be no point in modifying them for higher frequency capability. If that were the case, he could have just found machines that already had the higher frequency capability. In regard to your further baseless speculation that the frequencies might have been generated by super-regenerative oscillation, I'll excerpt a post from 2002 by Aubrey Scoon, in answer to my comments along this same line: " You don't understand super-regeneration. I don't blame you, most professional engineers don't understand super-regen. It is impossible for the quench frequency of a super-regen circuit to be higher than the carrier frequency. If it was, the machine would never oscillate at all because the wave would get quenched before it had ever built up even a single cycle! So if the CPS was the base signal and the WSR was the quench then the machine couldn't have worked at all for BX for example where the WSR is roughly 1 1/2 times GREATER than the base signal. Super regen is an amplification technique, it is only used for amplifying extremely weak signals, it has no practical use as an oscillator and is specifically designed not to go into oscillation. There is no conceivable reason how or why Rife's original signal would have been so weak (we're talking microvolts here or less) that it required super regen amplification. Plus super-regen is horrendously sensitive and noisy. If the machine input was super-regenerative it would have pumped out terrible electrical noise and in which case we could never be sure if ANY figure listed had any relation at all to any real MOR. " I think these remarks by Aubrey Scoon thoroughly show the impossibility of the super-regenerative oscillator theory. As I indicated, I believed this idea too back in the dark ages; but the new information and interpretations we have are far more " workable " . If you have something contrary to say, the burden of proof rests on you. Build a super-regenerative oscillator and set it to figures mentioned in the BX lab note and report back to us. > >The later frequency list that was made > >from the older machine to transfer to the newer #4 > >machine also confirms this. The reason that one of > >the figures is in " wavelength " is because the > >wavemeter that he used to make the measurement was > >calibrated in meters. > > So then why was one frequency given in Hz and the > other in metres? > That's not consistent with your explanation. Because the other wavemeter was calibrated in cycles per second. Why don't you ask why there is only one frequency listed in the frequency chart that Hoyland made? > >It's that simple. The use of a > >wavemeter also explains the higher harmonics that > he > >picked up from the plasma tube. > > Hoyland's frequency list may indeed be correct. But > you are presuming > this is an error on Rife's part. How do we know he > was not > consciously applying the higher harmonics he > measured? Rife's comments regarding harmonics would tend to preclude this. He said that some of the frequencies he found may be harmonics, the context indicating that he meant sub-harmonics. He said that if he had the true frequency that it would work better, because there would be more power in it. If he was trying to get a higher frequency, he would have just ran that frequency directly. At any rate, it's a moot point because even if he was trying to consciously apply higher harmonics, he would still have to focus on what the frequency machine could generate, so he could reproduce it. As I've said before, I think it's much better to harmonize our interpretations with the bigger, overall picture, rather than latching onto minutiae and giving them more significance than is warranted. The newer interpretations presented in Jeff's paper may not be the final word, but they are far more coherent and practical than what was before. I don't see any substance at all in your speculations. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 --- Nielsen wrote: > > >The evidence indicates that the two frequencies > >involved are the MOR, and the fixed audio pulsing > >frequency. I mentioned that in my post. > > Two, three, audio, fixed? Maybe. Are you making a point here or just being a contrarian? > >This idea of heterodyning two frequencies of light > in > >the microscope is oft repeated without any > supporting > >evidence, or knowledge of where the idea > originates. > > According to my study, it relates to the activity of > second, or > monochromatic, beam of light admitted to the > specimen. Optical > heterodyning is now a well established principle. Maybe so, but it has nothing to do with the Rife microscope. The Risley prism unit is for bending the angle of incidence of the light to select a specific wavelength. It has nothing to do with heterodyning two ultraviolet wavelengths to get a visible wavelength, as has been claimed. I've shone a laser through a Risley prism unit and it's very clear to see how the beam of light moves from side to side. > >This subject has been covered before. It may be one > >explanation, but we don't see the spark diathermy > >machine in the photo with the four wires. > > Sure, but you don't see Rife either, or alot of > other things. Rather > we could ask, _why_ was there a diathermy machine in > his lab at all? > Such instruments are known to be capable of > producing a range of > monopolar and bipolar waveforms, including damped > sinusoidals. Actually, to be more precise, we don't know that it was a diathermy machine. I was told by Jeff Behary of the electrotherapy museum that it looked like a spark telegraph wall plate. At any rate, I don't know what point you're trying to make, since we already know from the lab film that there was a damped waveform. > >Where did you read this? Rife said he found his > >frequencies by " hunt and try " method, not any > >calculations. > > To an extent. But, are you saying he knew nothing > about resonant > wavelengths. That's a " predictive calculation " . I didn't say he knew nothing about resonant wavelengths; I quoted Rife's description of what he did. He gave no mention of " predictive calculation " . > My > point was that he > is reported to have been surprised at how low the > frequencies were. > Anyone operating on the resonance premise would be. I'll ask you again, where is this reported? <snip> > >I think you're reading a little too much into this. > >My understanding is that Rife wound some of his > coils > >in his very earliest research, before he moved on > to > >the Kennedy equipment. > > This is conjectural. How do you know he didn't keep > winding them? Because it was stated that he wasn't interested in that part of the work. Why did he have other people repair his machines and design new ones if he was so good at doing all that himself? > >Yes, but if guys like Jim s and Jeff Garff had > >this attitude, we wouldn't have our present > knowledge > >and understanding. > > The " attitude " is healthy skepticism. Presumably, > that is why they > challenged previous interpretations of the second > Hartley in the > Gruner circuit. That's the way science works. That comment was in response to your comment that it is " overly optimistic to attempt to " explode " pathogens within the body using one frequency, let alone a far lower harmonic of the resonant wavelength. " With the level of " healthy skepticism " that you display, nobody will ever get around to trying to " explode pathogens " . <snip> > >(snip) We need to follow the clues > >that we have and test them out, not resign with the > >attitude that it's " overly optimistic " , based on > >purely intellectual analysis. > > , it seems you are reading things into my > posts, and then > responding with a fixed set of comfortable > assumptions. Most of the > technical points I raised go addressed. For example, > the question of > the low grid voltages. I don't really feel this is > constructive. If > you would like to discuss anything, please provide > additional > references or factual data. Otherwise, we just have > a difference of > interpretation. Well , I read what you write. My responses are based largely on things we know about Rife's work, from the hard efforts of guys like Jeff Garff and Jim s. You ask me to provide additional references or factual data, but you don't do the same. It seems that all you've been doing lately is just " questioning " issues that have been reasonably well demonstrated, without providing anything of substance to support your questionings. I've been getting the impression that your " healthy skepticism " is beginning to go beyond that and is becoming more along the line of contrarianism. You're an engineer and have built devices. Why don't you just test out your theories and speculations and report your results? If it's overly optimistic to try to " explode " an organism with just one frequency, do it the way you think it should be done and report your results. What's wrong with that proposition? Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 [ Wrote] I think that's a fundamental difference between you and I. I try to proceed by the light of what _is known_, not what isn't known. [Ken Uzzell writes] Well, from what is known with the latest document from Jeff Dr Rife used a variable RF carrier between 400kHz to just over 1.6MHz Dr Rife gated this carrier with a fixed audio signal. I'm just trying to get my head around this so I can build a device that mimicked what Dr Rife did. I have a beautiful USB controlled DDS function generator that goes from 1Hz to 85MHz with such a tiny error it is amazing how far technology has come. Only +/- 10Hz at 85MHz, I hope to scope this soon to check this error claim. USB powered it does a 5 volt peak to peak DC sine wave. The tricky part is winding a coil that will have its Q around 950kHz so we might be able to ignite a plasma tube between 400kHz and 1.6MHz. I guess an engineer would know if this is possible. From my understanding Dr Rife used 2 transformers in his machine to do this? It's no problem gating this variable RF with a fixed audio. We could even use a variable audio that has a harmonic relation to the RF carrier. This might generate a resonating signal, anything could happen here :-) Should we be working at getting all this done via sine waves or can we square them up? From my understanding Dr Rife was using a wave form closer to sine waves than square waves. If I am even close to being correct in the above, then it is clear we have been doing everything in reverse to what Dr Rife did. No wonder it hasn't been working as it worked for him. Although I must admit our machines are working pretty fantastically. Wouldn't it be wonderful if this new type of machine, much closer to what Dr Rife used actually knock those pathogen stone cold dead. I bet this would get you excited! It would be very easy to make this using electrodes, but a little more difficult in getting the transformers right for plasma tube work. Question: Would a variable RF signal between 400kHz to 1.6MHz out a 60 watt plasma tube get us in trouble with the government radio people who police RF transmission? Regards Ken Uzzell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 --- Ken Uzzell wrote: > Well, from what is known with the latest document > from Jeff > > Dr Rife used a variable RF carrier between 400kHz to > just over 1.6MHz Make that about 90 kHz to 2 MHz. > Dr Rife gated this carrier with a fixed audio > signal. Correct. > I'm just trying to get my head around this so I can > build a device that > mimicked what Dr Rife did. > > I have a beautiful USB controlled DDS function > generator <snip> > > The tricky part is winding a coil that will have its > Q around 950kHz so we > might be able to ignite a plasma tube between 400kHz > and 1.6MHz. I guess an > engineer would know if this is possible. From my > understanding Dr Rife used > 2 transformers in his machine to do this? If you want to build a machine with your DDS generator, it would probably be best to build a class A amplifier without any tuned circuits and drive the plasma tube directly. > It's no problem gating this variable RF with a fixed > audio. We could even > use a variable audio that has a harmonic relation to > the RF carrier. This > might generate a resonating signal, anything could > happen here :-) Perhaps. It appears that the gating audio frequency is for the purpose of switching the plasma on and off to produce the spikes in the waveform. Ralph Hartwell's work seems to confirm this: http://w5jgv.com/rife/pulse1/pulse1.htm > Should we be working at getting all this done via > sine waves or can we > square them up? From my understanding Dr Rife was > using a wave form closer > to sine waves than square waves. It appears that the gating can be done with a narrow duty cycle square wave. The MOR carrier wave is sinusoidal. > If I am even close to being correct in the above, > then it is clear we have > been doing everything in reverse to what Dr Rife > did. No wonder it hasn't > been working as it worked for him. That's the way I see it. The present RF plasma systems use a fixed high frequency carrier and variable audio frequencies. Since the carrier is supposed to be the MOR, that would explain why these systems haven't been totally successful in producing the Rife effect. > Although I must > admit our machines are > working pretty fantastically. No argument there. For me, it has never been an issue of whether the modern machines work. There is more than sufficient evidence that they do work. People wouldn't continue to use them for so many years if they didn't work. > Wouldn't it be wonderful if this new type of > machine, much closer to what Dr > Rife used actually knock those pathogen stone cold > dead. I bet this would > get you excited! That's an understatement if I ever heard one! ;^) I've literally spent almost my entire adult life researching this subject. When I first read about Rife, all I wanted was to buy myself a " Rife machine " for my own personal use. If I had known I would spend this much time, effort, and money, I would have picked up a novel instead. ;^) > It would be very easy to make this > using electrodes, but a > little more difficult in getting the transformers > right for plasma tube > work. We still don't know whether the frequencies in this range will " do the business " without a plasma tube. The first thing we need to do is get a definite Rife effect, and then test out variations such as pad machines. > Question: Would a variable RF signal between 400kHz > to 1.6MHz out a 60 watt > plasma tube get us in trouble with the government > radio people who police RF > transmission? It sure would! This is right across the entire AM band. The Gruner/Beam Ray machine radiates for about a half mile, right in the band that HAMs use. If any were nearby, they would probably cause trouble, even if they were cured by your broadcast. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 HI all, As a point of interest, when scientists stimulated neurons with either a minor physical " ping " , or a minor electrical shock, or a lethal knockout, the neurons fired off electrically, and the signal was identical to the large spike one in Ralphs photos. From a surface electrode or handheld point of view, I have always utilised this waveform in Electro systems eg TENS, Micro-current etc. The large spike seems to make a huge difference to therapy results. Kerry Kind Regards, Kerry G Tume M.Ac.F. M.I.L.A. A.C.O.N.T. www.tumelaser.com Clini-Lase, Laser 3000 Therapeutic Lasers PH: (61) 08 8327 0845 Mobile: 0431674910 Re: Testing Rife Frequencies on Bacterial Cultures --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.8/1362 - Release Date: 6/04/2008 11:12 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 Hi Kerry, So there could be good value in building an electrode system with a variable RF carrier gated by an audio signal. As we are dealing with Dr Rife's specific frequencies, then a sine wave should do as we are not necessarily using harmonics to do the work, but the exact MOR, although the gating audio frequency may generate its own harmonics. It will be interesting to see how this looks on an oscilloscope, and to see if the spike is generated with our modern day technology. I know Jim Bare has place importance on the rising spike of the B/R system as being an effect part of the transmission signal. Looks like a beefy plasma transmission system is out, unless this new information provided the key that does the trick that is looking for, and if these little microbe critters start rolling over and dying, then it would be worth the trouble of lining a room with Australian builders sarking to create a cheap and easy faraday cage to earth the transmission and keep it from interfering with the AM bandwidth to have an potent real Dr Rife system. If your knocking out cancers real quick, and working at 100% remissions, then this would most definitely get oncology looking at this cure for all diseases. Every hospital and doctors clinic would have a room for this purpose. Even Mum's and Dad's at home could do a room for this therapy. Imagine, no more threat from pathogens, what a wonderful, fearless world it could be. Especially if its backed up by a resonance scanner that works to find the exact MOR to start with. Cripies, this would change the face of medicine and health care throughout the world. Regards, Ken Uzzell http://heal-me.com.au Re: Re: Testing Rife Frequencies on Bacterial Cultures HI all, As a point of interest, when scientists stimulated neurons with either a minor physical " ping " , or a minor electrical shock, or a lethal knockout, the neurons fired off electrically, and the signal was identical to the large spike one in Ralphs photos. From a surface electrode or handheld point of view, I have always utilised this waveform in Electro systems eg TENS, Micro-current etc. The large spike seems to make a huge difference to therapy results. Kerry Kind Regards, Kerry G Tume M.Ac.F. M.I.L.A. A.C.O.N.T. www.tumelaser.com Clini-Lase, Laser 3000 Therapeutic Lasers PH: (61) 08 8327 0845 Mobile: 0431674910 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 Hello Ken, Over this last week we have built a new AZ-58 that has a variable tuning capacitor. This gives this new style of AZ-58 Ray tube instrument a frequency range of 1.2MHz to 1.95MHz. This will keep us out of the HAMs frequency range. The power output is less than the Beam Rays instrument but this should keep use within a quarter mile frequency range. This should not bother the AM radio stations because the FCC allows neighborhood broadcasting of Radio and TV within a quarter mile. The FCC would probably never approve of it but we may be able to stay under the radar for those who want to use it anyway. You also would probably not want to use it in an apartment building or condominiums because it might mess up the neighbors TV or Radio. If you have a basement this would be the best place to run it. This new design will also allow us to use the fundamental frequency of 1.604MHz which will have more power in it, instead of having to heterodyne to get it. Even at this lower power output the 1.604MHz will have twice the power output in it than the Beam Rays design. This should be a big plus. Jeff Garff > > Hi Kerry, > > So there could be good value in building an electrode system with a variable > RF carrier gated by an audio signal. As we are dealing with Dr Rife's > specific frequencies, then a sine wave should do as we are not necessarily > using harmonics to do the work, but the exact MOR, although the gating audio > frequency may generate its own harmonics. It will be interesting to see how > this looks on an oscilloscope, and to see if the spike is generated with our > modern day technology. I know Jim Bare has place importance on the rising > spike of the B/R system as being an effect part of the transmission signal. > > Looks like a beefy plasma transmission system is out, unless this new > information provided the key that does the trick that is looking for, > and if these little microbe critters start rolling over and dying, then it > would be worth the trouble of lining a room with Australian builders sarking > to create a cheap and easy faraday cage to earth the transmission and keep > it from interfering with the AM bandwidth to have an potent real Dr Rife > system. > > If your knocking out cancers real quick, and working at 100% remissions, > then this would most definitely get oncology looking at this cure for all > diseases. Every hospital and doctors clinic would have a room for this > purpose. Even Mum's and Dad's at home could do a room for this therapy. > Imagine, no more threat from pathogens, what a wonderful, fearless world it > could be. Especially if its backed up by a resonance scanner that works to > find the exact MOR to start with. Cripies, this would change the face of > medicine and health care throughout the world. > > Regards, > Ken Uzzell > http://heal-me.com.au > > > Re: Re: Testing Rife Frequencies on Bacterial Cultures > > HI all, > > As a point of interest, when scientists stimulated neurons with either a > minor physical " ping " , or a minor electrical shock, or a lethal knockout, > the neurons fired off electrically, and the signal was identical to the > large spike one in Ralphs photos. > > From a surface electrode or handheld point of view, I have always utilised > this waveform in Electro systems eg TENS, Micro-current etc. > > The large spike seems to make a huge difference to therapy results. > > Kerry > Kind Regards, > Kerry G Tume > M.Ac.F. M.I.L.A. A.C.O.N.T. > www.tumelaser.com > Clini-Lase, Laser 3000 Therapeutic Lasers > PH: (61) 08 8327 0845 > Mobile: 0431674910 > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 >This new design will also allow us to use the fundamental frequency >of 1.604MHz which will have more power in it, instead of having to >heterodyne to get it. Even at this lower power output the 1.604MHz >will have twice the power output in it than the Beam Rays design. >This should be a big plus. > >Jeff Garff Do I understand correctly that, in this case, you are not wiring a separate oscillator to each electrode for the heterodyning effect mentioned in your paper? IOW you are now using a fixed audio frequency gated RF? Please elaborate. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 >As a point of interest, when scientists stimulated neurons with >either a minor physical " ping " , or a minor electrical shock, or a >lethal knockout, the neurons fired off electrically, and the signal >was identical to the large spike one in Ralphs photos. > > From a surface electrode or handheld point of view, I have always > utilised this waveform in Electro systems eg TENS, Micro-current etc. The spike seems to be an electrotherapy mainstay dating back to the early 1900's. The fast rise time makes it highly inductive. May I ask if this is a _bipolar_ spike you are using, Kerry? If not, are you aware of the effects upon tissue of a polarized waveform? Lily designed a special waveform to address this. Without a discharge (or relaxation) cycle, the electric charge simply builds up internally, at which point any frequency stimulated effect diminishes. It also promotes ion imbalance. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 Perhaps I should simply clarify my observations with regard to Rife's early equipment. Some have claimed only the two Kennedy generators were used, thus limiting frequencies to two. According to 's recent replies, the secret of Rife's success is now due to a fixed audio and variable RF component. IOW one effective CR frequency per pathogen. Presumably, this interpretation is motivated by Jeff et al's yet unproven work based upon the Beam Ray. Aside from the fact Jeff's proposed mechanism actually requires three frequencies, I see a few discrepencies historically. Yes, a spike can arise within a plasma due to audio gating. The result is similar to a shock wave, and will propagate beyond the tube. However, a squarewave is normally indicated for this. The Kennedy's, if unmodified, produced only sinewaves. Furthermore, the shock wave would be highly bioactive. So why has no such signifcance been accorded to the audio gating frequency, either in Rife's day or the present? Why was it not used as the CR, or an harmonic thereof, instead of being fixed? Rife's lab reports disclose an " audiotron " plate voltage of 135 and 140V for two pathogens. Presumably, this applies to the RF power amplifier. However, it is too low to ignite the plasma tube. This implies a power source of higher voltage was connected in parallel, and that it was possibly the origin of any spike or damped wave, not fixed audio gating. This may have been a diathermy machine, or the like. The plate voltage relates to the frequency given as a wavelength, so it appears as if the cps frequency was applied to the grid. Rife refers to the wavelength as the " super-regeneration " frequency. If this is correct, it suggests the plate of the audiotron was powered by a HV RF signal, not a DC B+ voltage. If so, where did this signal come from, and why was it not applied via the generators, as a modulated signal, to the grid? It seems to me a different effect was intended, perhaps oscillatory, whether or not it involved super regeneration. IMO the relationship between Hoyland's frequencies and those in Rife's lab notes, expressed in cps and wavelength, is still unresolved. Jeff's paper suggests they are related due to harmonics generated within the plasma tube. My point is that Rife measured them and knew they were being emitted. It is to these that he attributed the effects of the machine, not the frequencies generated by the Kennedy's. As points out, he also realized these were too low to be the fundamental resonant frequencies of the pathogens tageted. Hence, Hoyland's frequencies may be of no value unless the rest of Rife's original setup is duplicated excactly. I welcome any comment or corrections to the above. Nielsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 ; Your comments as always are very interesting. One other commonality about Rife is two RF oscillators, on the #4, the Gruner circuit and the two Kennedy receivers. These of course can be used for at least two reasons. 1 Some pathogens needed two frequencies at once for a elimination of the disease. 2 To create a diff frequency MOR by the use of two RF oscillators. Looking at Rife from the perspective that two frequencies ran at the same time are needed to kill some pathogens,seems to indicate that the two oscillators are not used to create a difference frequency, for normal opperation of the instrument. I may have just talked myself out of the difference frequency theory,unless there is some carrier that we are not sure of. Mike > > > >: The closest I can come using a spur calculator is a > >harmonic at 11.78031 with an input of 1.604 and 16.59231 MHz. > >But I believe that Jeff/ have pointed out that the 11.78 or the > >17.033 is wrong and should read 1.604. > > I understood the 1.604MHz was the output signal and the other two > were inductively measured from the plasma tube. If so, that makes > them complementary, not wrong or mutually exclusive. Furthermore, > according to Rife's lab notes, the latter two appear to have been > separate entities, and relate to different functions of the circuit. > It also appears two Kennedy receivers were used. How does this fit > with the single frequency interpretation? > > >The use of a high voltage spike at an audio rate is consistant with > >The Hoffman/Abrams dead beat oscillator, the electronic Oscilloclast > >also used an audio rate gating circuit to excite the RF oscillator. > > Yes, I pointed this out to the list, and Jeff, a long time ago as a > possible Rife lineage. It was only subsequent to this that serious > interest in damped waves seems to have developed. I was then looking > into this experimentally. There is a little circuit here which is > simply an LM555, variable between 14-20KHz, switching a complementary > pair which drives a resonant coil. The oscillator can be gated with > any frequency (squarewave) in the audio range via a computer program. > I used CoolEdit 2000. The resulting waveform is an audio gated > ultrasonic damped wave with a ring frequency of about 2MHz. As a > contact device, I found it to be more effective than a single > frequency or basic AM. > > >The machine with AM modulaton and gating and Gruner circuit > >with RF difference frequencies and gating would emulate this effect. > > I believe we are still waiting for confirmation from Jeff's group > regarding the authenticity and clinical effectiveness of the Gruner > heterodyning. As previously mentioned, I have doubts regarding their > re-interpretation of the diagram. To my mind, the most compelling > thing to emerge so far is the presence of a damped wave. If I had > access to their equipment, I would try using just this to power the > tube and apply the CR frequency in parallel via a separate tunable > (Hartley?) oscillator. > > >We can take s reference to the MOR's being a single frequency > >in the KC range, coupled with Hoylands measurements of the > >dial settings versus frequency, to support the single frequency > >theory. > > Yes, but these are two completely different frequency ranges. And the > possibility of supportive frequencies is not precluded. I recall Rife > stated, in one instance, a " carrier " was used, and that certain > conditions required two frequencies or negative results would ensue. > > Nielsen > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 ; Your comments as always are very interesting. One other commonality about Rife is two RF oscillators, on the #4, the Gruner circuit and the two Kennedy receivers. These of course can be used for at least two reasons. 1 Some pathogens needed two frequencies at once for a elimination of the disease. 2 To create a diff frequency MOR by the use of two RF oscillators. Looking at Rife from the perspective that two frequencies ran at the same time are needed to kill some pathogens,seems to indicate that the two oscillators are not used to create a difference frequency, for normal opperation of the instrument. I may have just talked myself out of the difference frequency theory,unless there is some carrier that we are not sure of. Mike > > > >: The closest I can come using a spur calculator is a > >harmonic at 11.78031 with an input of 1.604 and 16.59231 MHz. > >But I believe that Jeff/ have pointed out that the 11.78 or the > >17.033 is wrong and should read 1.604. > > I understood the 1.604MHz was the output signal and the other two > were inductively measured from the plasma tube. If so, that makes > them complementary, not wrong or mutually exclusive. Furthermore, > according to Rife's lab notes, the latter two appear to have been > separate entities, and relate to different functions of the circuit. > It also appears two Kennedy receivers were used. How does this fit > with the single frequency interpretation? > > >The use of a high voltage spike at an audio rate is consistant with > >The Hoffman/Abrams dead beat oscillator, the electronic Oscilloclast > >also used an audio rate gating circuit to excite the RF oscillator. > > Yes, I pointed this out to the list, and Jeff, a long time ago as a > possible Rife lineage. It was only subsequent to this that serious > interest in damped waves seems to have developed. I was then looking > into this experimentally. There is a little circuit here which is > simply an LM555, variable between 14-20KHz, switching a complementary > pair which drives a resonant coil. The oscillator can be gated with > any frequency (squarewave) in the audio range via a computer program. > I used CoolEdit 2000. The resulting waveform is an audio gated > ultrasonic damped wave with a ring frequency of about 2MHz. As a > contact device, I found it to be more effective than a single > frequency or basic AM. > > >The machine with AM modulaton and gating and Gruner circuit > >with RF difference frequencies and gating would emulate this effect. > > I believe we are still waiting for confirmation from Jeff's group > regarding the authenticity and clinical effectiveness of the Gruner > heterodyning. As previously mentioned, I have doubts regarding their > re-interpretation of the diagram. To my mind, the most compelling > thing to emerge so far is the presence of a damped wave. If I had > access to their equipment, I would try using just this to power the > tube and apply the CR frequency in parallel via a separate tunable > (Hartley?) oscillator. > > >We can take s reference to the MOR's being a single frequency > >in the KC range, coupled with Hoylands measurements of the > >dial settings versus frequency, to support the single frequency > >theory. > > Yes, but these are two completely different frequency ranges. And the > possibility of supportive frequencies is not precluded. I recall Rife > stated, in one instance, a " carrier " was used, and that certain > conditions required two frequencies or negative results would ensue. > > Nielsen > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 , Mike; I think you guys are just running around in circles and going nowhere. It seems that you don't want to accept the explanations from people who are actually building and testing systems based on the available evidence, but you aren't building and testing systems based on your own interpretations. Regarding more than one frequency for an MOR, did you miss the photo of just one Kennedy machine set up? Did you miss the lab film where Rife set just one oscillator? Did you miss the fact that Rife always talked about the MORs in the singular? Did you miss the fact that Siner's reading of the BX research report mentioned a meters figure that was equal to the CPS figure? It seems that you guys need explanations that are more complicated than is necessary. Each form of an organism has a single frequency as its MOR, notwithstanding the practical possibility that there may be harmonics or other frequencies that are also MORs for a particular form. But Rife was dealing with just a single variable. If he had to adjust more than one variable to get his MOR, it would have been practically impossible to get anything done. He said that it took him sometimes months to find a single frequency, and that's working sometimes 16-20 hours a day. The gating frequency, even if we granted that it was variable, would had to have been inherent to the system he was using. If he had to find a correct combination of RF frequency or frequencies, and audio gating frequency, it would have taken orders of magnitude longer to find an MOR; it would have been practically impossible. The waveform tracing of the #4 machine on the lab film shows that there was an audio gating frequency, but there's no mention of it in the frequency charts that Hoyland made. Rife just set the switch and dial for one of the main oscillators and that was it. We also now know that the tracing on the lab film was reversed. We don't know whether the oscilloscope was set to scan from right to left, or whether they reversed it to hide the true waveform, but the linear distortion on the left side definitely shows that it is reversed from normal. That means that the waveform was a damped form, and not an exponential growth pulse as would be the case if it was super-regenerative. Regarding the frequencies, we don't have a good handle on those. We don't know that they came shortly after the Beam Rays trial. The general idea is that Rife was inactive during the war, and closed his lab in 1946. It may be that the frequencies were some type of gating or quenching frequencies from the original machines that misinterpreted as being MORs. At any rate, unless someone can demonstrate the Rife effect with the frequencies, they're not MORs. If you have other theories regarding them, the only way you're going to find out is if you build a device and test it out. On the point about some diseases needing two frequencies, Rife said that he had found this to be the case only with TB. He had to run the MOR for the rod form and the filterable form to successfully treat TB. But you don't need to run them simultaneously; you could run them consecutively. It would just take twice as long. In my opinion, the explanations that have come out of the work done by Jeff Garff and Jim s are simpler, more coherent, and better fit the bigger picture of what Rife was doing. We still don't have the final word, but the new work has produced workable, real-world devices. I'm still waiting for your theories and speculations to produce some functional hardware that can be tested. As Jim s said, it's amazing how many little mysteries clear up when you actually build and test something out. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 , Mike; I think you guys are just running around in circles and going nowhere. It seems that you don't want to accept the explanations from people who are actually building and testing systems based on the available evidence, but you aren't building and testing systems based on your own interpretations. Regarding more than one frequency for an MOR, did you miss the photo of just one Kennedy machine set up? Did you miss the lab film where Rife set just one oscillator? Did you miss the fact that Rife always talked about the MORs in the singular? Did you miss the fact that Siner's reading of the BX research report mentioned a meters figure that was equal to the CPS figure? It seems that you guys need explanations that are more complicated than is necessary. Each form of an organism has a single frequency as its MOR, notwithstanding the practical possibility that there may be harmonics or other frequencies that are also MORs for a particular form. But Rife was dealing with just a single variable. If he had to adjust more than one variable to get his MOR, it would have been practically impossible to get anything done. He said that it took him sometimes months to find a single frequency, and that's working sometimes 16-20 hours a day. The gating frequency, even if we granted that it was variable, would had to have been inherent to the system he was using. If he had to find a correct combination of RF frequency or frequencies, and audio gating frequency, it would have taken orders of magnitude longer to find an MOR; it would have been practically impossible. The waveform tracing of the #4 machine on the lab film shows that there was an audio gating frequency, but there's no mention of it in the frequency charts that Hoyland made. Rife just set the switch and dial for one of the main oscillators and that was it. We also now know that the tracing on the lab film was reversed. We don't know whether the oscilloscope was set to scan from right to left, or whether they reversed it to hide the true waveform, but the linear distortion on the left side definitely shows that it is reversed from normal. That means that the waveform was a damped form, and not an exponential growth pulse as would be the case if it was super-regenerative. Regarding the frequencies, we don't have a good handle on those. We don't know that they came shortly after the Beam Rays trial. The general idea is that Rife was inactive during the war, and closed his lab in 1946. It may be that the frequencies were some type of gating or quenching frequencies from the original machines that misinterpreted as being MORs. At any rate, unless someone can demonstrate the Rife effect with the frequencies, they're not MORs. If you have other theories regarding them, the only way you're going to find out is if you build a device and test it out. On the point about some diseases needing two frequencies, Rife said that he had found this to be the case only with TB. He had to run the MOR for the rod form and the filterable form to successfully treat TB. But you don't need to run them simultaneously; you could run them consecutively. It would just take twice as long. In my opinion, the explanations that have come out of the work done by Jeff Garff and Jim s are simpler, more coherent, and better fit the bigger picture of what Rife was doing. We still don't have the final word, but the new work has produced workable, real-world devices. I'm still waiting for your theories and speculations to produce some functional hardware that can be tested. As Jim s said, it's amazing how many little mysteries clear up when you actually build and test something out. Regards, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 >, Mike; I think you guys are just running around >in circles and going nowhere. It seems that you don't >want to accept the explanations from people who are >actually building and testing systems based on the >available evidence, but you aren't building and >testing systems based on your own interpretations. Thanks for the complements, . But no new information. Only those pesky gophers making bumps in your nice even turf. The defensive stance kind of shows. Not really conducive to new possiblities. Gophers are cute and inquisitive. I don't think they need or appreciate a lecture; let alone from a member of a group that publishes hypotheses as fact. I am referring to the Beam Ray heterodyning. Sure, it lights the tube, but what else? If it's so revolutionary, why is Jeff not using it in his new design. Something about " simplicity " ? I am certainly aware of the historical " evidence " you list. There could be any number of explanations for the discrepencies you choose to see. I am also aware that your preferred interpretation has never yielded the Rife effect. Typically, this is different from last year's unequivocal interpretation. And on it goes, as speculative as anyone else's, replete with rationalizations about any recent changes in viewpoint. You must be the guy who is always right. Yes, we have heard it all before. That's the point. I hope people will not be put off sharing ideas here simply because others seem to believe they have a monopoly on the truth. May I suggest you adopt a more deferential attitude until you can deliver the goods? IMO anyone who is interested in this topic deserves respect. Contrary to your baseless insinuations, I do build and test equipment based on the principles we have been discussing. This is what happens to people who think they have all the facts. The idea that they do becomes more important than the facts themselves. 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.