Re: New revision of Rife History document

[Guest guest]

--- Nielsen wrote:

> Since you did not ask " what " experience, I gather

> you are trying to

> question my credentials, rather than the technical

> details presently

> under discussion.

>

> The short answer, to match your short question, is

> that I am an

> electronics engineer with backgrounds in marine

> biology and

> neuro-technology. At various times, over the past

> thirty years, I

> have experimented with plasma antennae for

> electrotherapy, among

> other things. I have several such devices of my own

> design that I

> currently use for self-testing.

I meant " what " . I did not intend to question your

credentials; I know you're an engineer.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Hello Mike,

I agree that the Rife Ray #4 had a carrier frequency. All the

documentation supports that concept. It would be nice to know what

carrier frequency it used. This carrier appears to have been used for

the same purpose as it was used with the Kennedy equipment. This

carrier only served one purpose, lighting the ray tube. Dr. Rife was

not trying to use heterodyning to produce the frequencies otherwise

he would not have needed all the frequency band ranges that the #4

instrument had. But having said this, the #4 did heterodyne

frequencies. It would have been impossible for it not to have done

this. Anytime you put two frequencies into the ray tube you are going

to get those frequencies plus the sum and difference.

Having tested this Gruner Beam Ray instrument I can produce audio

frequencies by heterodyning but it fluctuates terribly. I could not

hit any audio frequency accurately within a few hundred hertz.

Because of this I do not believe that Dr. Rife could have produced

any useful audio frequencies with the #4 instrument.

I also do not believe what Philip Hoyland did with the Beam Ray

instrument violated the Rife method. If Dr. Rife had been using the

heterodyning method he would have understood what Hoyland was doing.

Dr. Rife wanted an instrument that he could set the oscillator to a

specific frequencies and that was the frequency he output. Hoyland's

circuit was not a strait forward circuit like what Dr. Rife was used

to using and this was why he said he did not like it. I personally do

mind adding A and B to get C.

The gating was also used in the #4 instrument. The 1936 lab film

shows the same waveform that Hoyland put in the Beam Rays instrument.

A square wave frequency of about 1300 hertz at a 25% duty cycle

should produce the same effect.

Dr. Rife knew Verne before he knew Philip Hoyland. Verne was

repairing Dr. Rife's equipment back in the early 1930s. This is why

Rife started having him repair the Beam Ray instruments after Hoyland

was gone. I am sure that both Rife and worked together on

the audio instruments built in the 1940s and 1950s. I also do not

believe that would have come up with the audio frequencies

by himself. The Aubrey Scoon instrument was built in the early 1940s.

We do not have an exact date but Bendini's investigation led him

to believe it was built about 1942. If this is correct then it would

have be about 2 years after the Beam Rays Company closed its doors.

There would have been plenty of time for them to come up with the

audio frequencies. There appears to be no mathematical relationship

between the audio frequencies and Dr. Rife's RF frequencies. This is

still a mystery. I hope one day we will have the answers.

Jeff Garff

> > > > >

> > > > > Well let me through out one more point that might need some

> > > > > discussion.

> > > > > Jeff now indicates that Hoyland was heterodyning,by mixing

a

> > > > carrier

> > > > > frequency with another RF frequency to generate the MOR.

> > > > > From the letter to by Jack Free explaining the

basic

> > Rife

> > > > > Principal 12/17/1935.

> > > > >

> > > > > " The frequency is set which controls the initial

oscillator,

> > > which

> > > > in

> > > > > turn is run through six stages of amplification, the last

> stage

> > > > > driving a 50 watt output tube.

> > > > >

> > > > > The frequency with its CARRIER wave is transmitted into an

> > output

> > > > > tube similar to the standard X-ray tube, but filled with a

> > > > different

> > > > > inert gas. This tube acts as a directional antenna. "

> > > > >

> > > > > It seems to me that the basic Rife principal and what

Hoyland

> > > > > did were basically the same thing.

> > > > >

> > > > > Old MIke

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Mike,

I should make it clear what I am calling the carrier frequency. It

would not have been modulated. It was only for lighting the ray tube.

I believe this is what was ment by a carrier frequeny.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Well let me through out one more point that might need

some

> > > > > > discussion.

> > > > > > Jeff now indicates that Hoyland was heterodyning,by

mixing

> a

> > > > > carrier

> > > > > > frequency with another RF frequency to generate the MOR.

> > > > > > From the letter to by Jack Free explaining the

> basic

> > > Rife

> > > > > > Principal 12/17/1935.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > " The frequency is set which controls the initial

> oscillator,

> > > > which

> > > > > in

> > > > > > turn is run through six stages of amplification, the last

> > stage

> > > > > > driving a 50 watt output tube.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The frequency with its CARRIER wave is transmitted into

an

> > > output

> > > > > > tube similar to the standard X-ray tube, but filled with

a

> > > > > different

> > > > > > inert gas. This tube acts as a directional antenna. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It seems to me that the basic Rife principal and what

> Hoyland

> > > > > > did were basically the same thing.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Old MIke

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

--- j_rifer wrote:

> I'm going to make statement that I want everybody to

> think about. If

> you look at the Phantron tube that was used in the

> clinical trials,

> you will see that it has two wires running to each

> side of the tube.

>

> I think there is a photo of the room where the

> treatments took place

> on my site.

>

> My question is why would he use two wires to each

> side?

It is probable that the other two wires were for the

part that lit the tube.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Hello Stan,

This may be one of the reasons. When I first tested the spark gap

transmitter I hooked it up to the ray tube with one set of wires and

lit the ray tube. I then hooked up a second set so I could input the

sine wave frequency from one of my AZ-58s. I had two wires hooked up

to each side of the ray tube. This method worked very well. It proved

to me that Dr. Rife could have used this method very easily. This

information and photos of the waveform is on page 26 of my paper.

Jeff Garff

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Well let me through out one more point that might need

some

> > > > > > discussion.

> > > > > > Jeff now indicates that Hoyland was heterodyning,by

mixing

> a

> > > > > carrier

> > > > > > frequency with another RF frequency to generate the MOR.

> > > > > > From the letter to by Jack Free explaining the

> basic

> > > Rife

> > > > > > Principal 12/17/1935.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > " The frequency is set which controls the initial

> oscillator,

> > > > which

> > > > > in

> > > > > > turn is run through six stages of amplification, the last

> > stage

> > > > > > driving a 50 watt output tube.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The frequency with its CARRIER wave is transmitted into

an

> > > output

> > > > > > tube similar to the standard X-ray tube, but filled with

a

> > > > > different

> > > > > > inert gas. This tube acts as a directional antenna. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It seems to me that the basic Rife principal and what

> Hoyland

> > > > > > did were basically the same thing.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Old MIke

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Stan,

Perhaps there were two sets of electrodes , but for what use?

The tube in that particular picture looks like a Pittard Safety Tube.

Later Rife tubes are modeled after the Coolidge design.

Jim Bare

>I'm going to make statement that I want everybody to think about. If

>you look at the Phantron tube that was used in the clinical trials,

>you will see that it has two wires running to each side of the tube.

>

>I think there is a photo of the room where the treatments took place

>on my site.

>

>My question is why would he use two wires to each side?

>

>Stan

[Guest guest]

--- Bare wrote:

> Stan,

>

> Perhaps there were two sets of electrodes , but for

> what use?

>

> The tube in that particular picture looks like a

> Pittard Safety Tube.

> Later Rife tubes are modeled after the Coolidge

> design.

It's called a Piffard Safety X-ray Tube:

http://www.orau.org/PTP/collection/xraytubes/grossbiloculated.htm

Rife said that this tube was the best one he ever had,

out of all of them. He said that the window was of

quartz, not soda glass as mentioned at the link above.

It didn't have two sets of electrodes.

Regards,