Cancer Cured... in 1934? AMA fought against the cure? Cancer is a micro-organism? What the...?!

Ok. guys.. idk if you have heard about the isalnd off the coast of NY.. doing bio warfare tests / mutations.. or the lime disease.. possible man mad diesease.. or the other things... i could go on forever... but the world is overpopulated.. could be one reason they dont release a cure.. if there was once a cure or if they know of one..
just thinking bout stuff... dont post negative comments please

If itis true and you can kill organisms at certain frequencies.. do humans have a frequency at which they will shatter like a glass or burst?

Originally posted by MaryStillToe
If itis true and you can kill organisms at certain frequencies.. do humans have a frequency at which they will shatter like a glass or burst?

Well, the thing is, is that it isn't true at all. This is one of those old legends that gets pumped up by physics-challenged TV and movie script writers from time to time.

First you have to ask "frequency of what?" because "frequency" is an attribute of something else. There isn't really a proper noun form of frequency that you can use as a tangible in a sentence. Tapping my finger rhythmically gives me a finger tapping frequency. A bird flapping its wings has a wing flap frequency. A sound has a frequency of compression and rarefaction of the media the sound's traveling in. EM waves have a frequency of how often the electric and magnetic field components alternate per second. And in every case, "frequency" is describing something entirely different. You can't even state correctly "you can kill organisms at certain frequencies" without saying frequency of what, which most of these guys avoid like the plague, because they don't have any understanding of what they're talking about.

Frequency just means how many repetitions per unit time something has. It's not a magical attribute.

Next, you have to have in mind that sound isn't radio waves, and radio waves aren't sound. Most of these guys tend to interchange them as if they were. They're as alike as gravel and yogurt.

Next, you have to understand the attributes of the structure you're trying to damage. Radio waves don't cause macro-scale mechanical stress. In other words, you may be able to shatter a glass with sound, because glass is very elastic, but brittle, and because sound is a mechanical deformation wave. These physical attributes allow the glass to efficiently store deformation energy (the elastic part) but not be able to withstand much physical strain (the brittle part), under stress from sound (which causes mechanical deformation) when and only when a proper physical resonance exists. You don't necessarily have a good mechanical resonance for every structural shape, which is why you don't see them breaking highball glasses with violin notes. In addition, your stress wave (the sound wavelength) has to "fit" the resonance mechanically, so the note you hit has to have a wavelength which is the same as, or possibly some close multiple of half-wavelengths of the physical structure. Thus if your wine glass is about 6" tall, and the physical resonance is the entire glass, top to bottom, your sound frequency will need to be about 6" in wavelength, although you might be able to do 3" or 9". The physical resonance size in general needs to be one of the longer axis of the structure, too, it's easier to break a piece of glass 6" long than one of the same thickness 1/4" long.

Radio waves aren't useful for this sort of thing. They aren't mechanical deformation waves like sound. About the only thing you can do with EM is couple to the molecules of the structure and cause heat, or at best ionization. You can't make a wine glass vibrate with radio waves. And in order to get heat, your radio wave needs to be fairly close to the effective dipole length of the molecule you're spinning, which is why FM radio stations don't microwave birds. In order to get more specific effects like quantum-mechanical coupling (spinning, scissoring, rocking etc) the requirement for being the right frequency is a lot more tight, which is how spectroscopy works. In most cases, in order to get quantum mechanical effects, you're going to need to be using microwaves up into visible light. That's a pretty high frequency. Anything less won't do much of anything, it's like using the wrong note for the wine glass.

Now, from time to time you'll see articles on how someone has shattered a virus with "a frequency". In this case, it's sort of like the wine glass. First, in every case, you'll find that they are doing this with viruses that form capsids, and particularly the more rigid ones. This gives you the elastic brittle structure you need to work on.

Next, you'll find that the "frequency" is one of sound, because radio waves don't do mechanical stress. And the frequency will be really amazingly high, what we call hypersonics. In the case of encapsulated viruses, it's generally in the 20-100GHz range, which is pretty hard to do, and about a million times more high pitched than sound you might be able to hear if your ears were really good.

If you calculate out the wavelength of that sound in saline, you'll find that voila! the effective "note" if you can call it that at 60GHz, is exactly the length of the long axis of the virus. Again, the wavelength of the sound HAS to match the length of the part of the virus you're shaking to pieces.

Now, for an encapsulated virus, you've got sort of a wine glass thing - it's elastic and brittle, and it comes in the same size every time.

For a bacteria, it's more like trying to break a water balloon with a sound. They don't always have a hard structure, but when they do, it's generally not brittle. Enough ultrasonic power, and you can shake everything in the culture to pieces, but it's by shear, not resonance. Basically it's like snipping it to bits with a scissors or smacking it with a hammer, and it's not selective.

In the case of Rife, he's not talking about sound, though. He's talking about radio waves, which don't cause mechanical resonances. Worse, he's talking about using radio waves with wavelengths that are hundreds of feet to miles long. Remember how the wavelength has to match the thing you're shaking, and that the only thing that EM can shake is molecules? It's off by a few million times. If that worked, everyone would be cured by the local AM station.

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by MaryStillToe
If itis true and you can kill organisms at certain frequencies.. do humans have a frequency at which they will shatter like a glass or burst?

Well, the thing is, is that it isn't true at all. This is one of those old legends that gets pumped up by physics-challenged TV and movie script writers from time to time.

First you have to ask "frequency of what?" because "frequency" is an attribute of something else. There isn't really a proper noun form of frequency that you can use as a tangible in a sentence. Tapping my finger rhythmically gives me a finger tapping frequency. A bird flapping its wings has a wing flap frequency. A sound has a frequency of compression and rarefaction of the media the sound's traveling in. EM waves have a frequency of how often the electric and magnetic field components alternate per second. And in every case, "frequency" is describing something entirely different. You can't even state correctly "you can kill organisms at certain frequencies" without saying frequency of what, which most of these guys avoid like the plague, because they don't have any understanding of what they're talking about.

Frequency just means how many repetitions per unit time something has. It's not a magical attribute.

Next, you have to have in mind that sound isn't radio waves, and radio waves aren't sound. Most of these guys tend to interchange them as if they were. They're as alike as gravel and yogurt.

Next, you have to understand the attributes of the structure you're trying to damage. Radio waves don't cause macro-scale mechanical stress. In other words, you may be able to shatter a glass with sound, because glass is very elastic, but brittle, and because sound is a mechanical deformation wave. These physical attributes allow the glass to efficiently store deformation energy (the elastic part) but not be able to withstand much physical strain (the brittle part), under stress from sound (which causes mechanical deformation) when and only when a proper physical resonance exists. You don't necessarily have a good mechanical resonance for every structural shape, which is why you don't see them breaking highball glasses with violin notes. In addition, your stress wave (the sound wavelength) has to "fit" the resonance mechanically, so the note you hit has to have a wavelength which is the same as, or possibly some close multiple of half-wavelengths of the physical structure. Thus if your wine glass is about 6" tall, and the physical resonance is the entire glass, top to bottom, your sound frequency will need to be about 6" in wavelength, although you might be able to do 3" or 9". The physical resonance size in general needs to be one of the longer axis of the structure, too, it's easier to break a piece of glass 6" long than one of the same thickness 1/4" long.

Radio waves aren't useful for this sort of thing. They aren't mechanical deformation waves like sound. About the only thing you can do with EM is couple to the molecules of the structure and cause heat, or at best ionization. You can't make a wine glass vibrate with radio waves. And in order to get heat, your radio wave needs to be fairly close to the effective dipole length of the molecule you're spinning, which is why FM radio stations don't microwave birds. In order to get more specific effects like quantum-mechanical coupling (spinning, scissoring, rocking etc) the requirement for being the right frequency is a lot more tight, which is how spectroscopy works. In most cases, in order to get quantum mechanical effects, you're going to need to be using microwaves up into visible light. That's a pretty high frequency. Anything less won't do much of anything, it's like using the wrong note for the wine glass.

Now, from time to time you'll see articles on how someone has shattered a virus with "a frequency". In this case, it's sort of like the wine glass. First, in every case, you'll find that they are doing this with viruses that form capsids, and particularly the more rigid ones. This gives you the elastic brittle structure you need to work on.

Next, you'll find that the "frequency" is one of sound, because radio waves don't do mechanical stress. And the frequency will be really amazingly high, what we call hypersonics. In the case of encapsulated viruses, it's generally in the 20-100GHz range, which is pretty hard to do, and about a million times more high pitched than sound you might be able to hear if your ears were really good.

If you calculate out the wavelength of that sound in saline, you'll find that voila! the effective "note" if you can call it that at 60GHz, is exactly the length of the long axis of the virus. Again, the wavelength of the sound HAS to match the length of the part of the virus you're shaking to pieces.

Now, for an encapsulated virus, you've got sort of a wine glass thing - it's elastic and brittle, and it comes in the same size every time.

For a bacteria, it's more like trying to break a water balloon with a sound. They don't always have a hard structure, but when they do, it's generally not brittle. Enough ultrasonic power, and you can shake everything in the culture to pieces, but it's by shear, not resonance. Basically it's like snipping it to bits with a scissors or smacking it with a hammer, and it's not selective.

In the case of Rife, he's not talking about sound, though. He's talking about radio waves, which don't cause mechanical resonances. Worse, he's talking about using radio waves with wavelengths that are hundreds of feet to miles long. Remember how the wavelength has to match the thing you're shaking, and that the only thing that EM can shake is molecules? It's off by a few million times. If that worked, everyone would be cured by the local AM station.

Finally, someone who understands.

second line.