It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
by following the Fibonacci series backward.
In addition you never showed the source of the "mHZ" signal in the paper.
No, I never made the mistake. Persinger was talking about MHz. The "mHz" is clearly not applicable here, given the window of observation.
The largest wave amplitude we observed was about 5 nT which occurred when the AE index was higher than 1500 nT. The period corresponding to the largest wave amplitudes was approx. 35 mins (approx. 0.48 mHz).
You obviously did not care to read the paper so you just keep spitting out your content-free pronouncements.
MEDA's dc magnetometers use the fluxgate technique to measure very low magnetic fields in the 0.5 nT to 200,000 nT range.
This instrument is not rated for varying fields, I looked at a few specs. It will show some readings, but these will be bullsh!t. Saying "moderately responsive" is not the same as actually calibrating the instrument (doubt these words mean anything to you, but somebody else will get it). So his 20 vs 70 nT comparison is all cr@p.
Originally posted by xecoybh
In the present experiment subjects were exposed to either no field (sham conditions) or to either 20 nT or 70 nT, 7 Hz, amplitude modulated (mHz range) magnetic fields for 30 min.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Do you care to explain how a 7Hz (whatever this means) magnetic field can be modulated in MHz range and still count as 7Hz?
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
Dude the 7 hertz is frequency and the megahertz is amplitude. So the Earth's field is electromagnetic but it is pulsing at 7 hertz frequency. For example: Effects of 7 Hz-modulated 450 MHz electromagnetic radiation on human performance in visual memory tasks
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
reply to post by buddhasystem
Dude -- Persinger is definitely talking about miliHertz not Megahertz as you erroneously claimed.
It's right in the abstract which I already quoted and said it was Persinger's description of the paper. Milihertz is then used throughout the paper! Hello?
Dude the 7 hertz is frequency and the megahertz is amplitude
I then explained that Megahertz is amplitude modulated by the 7 hertz.
You obviously did not care to read the paper so you just keep spitting out your content-free pronouncements.
I'm the one having to correct your inability to understand Persinger's paper.
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
Keep in mind that it is very very common for people to rely on classical physics -- commutative math -- and then project that onto quantum physics.
The foundation of physics is quantum physics not classical physics. Yet people learn classical physics first.
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
reply to post by buddhasystem
O.K. so the frequency of Persinger's study is 7 hertz -- no modulation. It's not even an issue.
Fig. 1. The pattern of amplitude changes over the 6 min simulation of a sudden storm commencement. The pattern was identical for the two conditions except the absolute maximum intensity averaged either 20 nT or 70 nT in the volume occupied by the participants.
Such latencies for electroencephalographic responses to weak magnetic fields within the nT to 1 T range have been shown in several other studies with different application geometries [16,17,20].
You said that in this paper Persinger used the "God Helmet" to create the magnetic filed. Did he or did he not?
On what Persinger used to produce his magnetic field -- usually he has some sort of God Helmet that he's infamous for.
Glancing at Persinger's paper -- indeed the source of the magnetic field is easily located:
Subjects were seated in a comfortable chair within an acoustically-shielded chamber (Faraday cage) described elsewhere [19]. The chair was located equidistant between 2 coils separated by 1 m. The coils were made from 70 turns each of 30 AWG wire wrapped around two racks of 1.2 m2, and have been used in previous studies [12]. Each coil had a resistance of about 115 . The coils were interfaced with a DOS-based PC (personal computer) through a custom-constructed digital-to-analog (DAC) converter. The PC-DAC apparatus was located outside the chamber.
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
reply to post by buddhasystem
Fig. 1. The pattern of amplitude changes over the 6 min simulation of a sudden storm commencement. The pattern was identical for the two conditions except the absolute maximum intensity averaged either 20 nT or 70 nT in the volume occupied by the participants.
Dude -- the amplitude is nT with a period of milihertz as I've already pointed out. Just give it up already. haha.
O.K. so the frequency of Persinger's study is 7 hertz -- no modulation. It's not even an issue.
ou're wrong about Persinger's paper in so many ways it's tragic because you've claimed to have taught this subject or something.
1) You were wrong about the Megahertz
2) you were wrong about what created the magnetic fields
3) you were wrong about the carrier frequency.
So now I've explained to you what the milihertz refers to -- it's the period of the nT amplitude.
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
reply to post by buddhasystem
I'm no longer responding to any of your fake questions or your claims without evidence as you've been consistently wrong about macroquantum reality, about Fourier analysis, and I can't remember everything else in this thread.
I look forward to a pleasant future of ignoring you and all I can recommend is that others do the same.
informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/15368378309009845
Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine
The Genesis of the EEG and its Relation to Electromagnetic Radiation
1983, Vol. 2, No. 2-3 , Pages 111-121
Lorne K. Direnfeld
Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine, 80 E Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118
The dominant frequencies in the human electroencephlogram (EEG) are 8–13 Hz (Alpha), 4–7 Hz (Theta), less than 4 Hz (Delta), and greater than 13 Hz (Beta). The conventional explanation of the mechanism for these dominant rhythms involves the effect of electrical activity i n the thalamus on the cortical synaptic potentials that are recorded in an EEG (1,2). Although electrical activity in the thalamus is of prime importance in determining what is recorded Ly the EEG, it is not known why the dominant rhythms recorded are of those specific frequencies. These dominant frequencies may be related through evolution to some aspect of the environment. This paper is devoted to a consideration of the possible relation between the brain's electrical activity and external electromagnetic fields.
(1) Elul, Rufael: The Genesis of the EEG, Int. Rev. Neurobiology 15, 227-
272, 1972
(2) Adey, W.R.: Organization of Brain Tissue: Is the Brain a Noisy Processor?,
International J. Neuroscience 3, 271-281, 1972.
(1/7) second = 0.142857143 seconds
The frequency is the reciprocal of the period. 1 / 10 Hz. = 0.1 seconds.
chronic epileptic rats [18] could be produced by whole body application of 7 Hz amplitude modulated magnetic fields in successive steps from 1 nT to approximately 50 nT every 3 min (∼5.6 mHz) for 2 h.
Participants were trained to inhibit 4 to 7 hertz and then simultaneously produce 15 to 18 hertz. EEG neurofeedback indi-viduals progressively learned to decrease the voltage of the 4 to 7 hertz, while voltage of the 15 to 18 hertz was not lowered.
The PC was equipped with custom software (Complex2) used to generate the simulated geomagnetic storm by converting a column of numbers (each value between 0 and 256) into voltages (±5 V) that were then applied through the coils as electric current. The point duration (duration of each successive voltage presentation) for each of the 5072 points was 69 ms. A single cycle lasted about 5 min and 50 s. The magnetic field pattern ran for 5 cycles.
The wave frequency band that Goertz and Smith [ 1989] mention as relevant to the substorm related heating is 1 to 5 mHz corresponding to ~3- to 16- min period. The wave amplitudes required are ~1 to 3 nT.
One research group conducted two studies [3,4] using the same 1.5 Hz and 10 Hz magnetic fields but applied the fields at two different intensities (100 T vs. 10 T) about a thousand times more intense than the ones employed in the present study.
The amplitude modulation pattern, which contained components and subcomponents within the mHZ range, is typical of geomagnetic power densities. The effectiveness of this particular pattern for producing electrical lability in rodents with histories of chemically-induced epilepsy has been shown.
"Modulation" cannot be "nanoTesla".
essentially a DC/static magnetic field detector and like all such devices it has a limited frequency range with some low level of sensitivity at very low field frequencies.
DC means direct current and static values do not have any frequency, be it 7Hz or 1000Hz, this is nonsense.
Ion Cyclotron Bioresonance in Regenerative Medicine piers.org/piersproceedings/download.php?file... Cells were exposed to a 7 Hz electromagnetic field (Bo field 9.2 μT) a commercially ... and Bo is the vector of the geomagnetic field (DC field) parallel to the
In addition, geomagnetic storm intensity is frequently described in terms of positive nanoTeslas per minute (nTs/min).
1 GHz NMR magnetic field is 23.5 Tesla.
Nano tesla sensor can detect weak magnetic field variation with a noise level of 1 nano tesla (1/10,000 of earth magnetism). This sensor consists of the one way detecting magnetic head (MI element) and the electric circuit operating that MI element. By restricting the cut-off frequency on the low frequency side to 0.1Hz, this model (sensor) cancels static magnetic field such as geomagnetism and respond to only moving ferrous object with high sensitivity.
MEDA's dc magnetometers use the fluxgate technique to measure very low magnetic fields in the 0.5 nT to 200,000 nT range.
The general conclusions are that more systematic research is needed, many more monitoring stations are needed, and full tri-axial electric and magnetic monitoring are required.
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
reply to post by pianopraze
Just to clear up the final lies by the B.S.er -- he's claiming that Persinger is using either 7 hertz or millihertz and it can't be both. The period of 7 hertz is 143 millihertz. Or the period is the inverse of the frequency so 1/7 cycles per second is
(1/7) second = 0.142857143 seconds
The amplitude modulation pattern, which contained components and subcomponents within the mHZ range, is typical of geomagnetic power densities. The effectiveness of this particular pattern for producing electrical lability in rodents with histories of chemically-induced epilepsy has been shown.
So this clearly shows that the amplitude modulation is nanoTesla in the millihertz range.
The DC static carrier frequency is 7 hertz -- not frequency modulated but a static field that is amplitude modulated.
A calibrated magnetometer was used to set a 60 Hz 50 microT field in the coil and an ammeter was used to measure the current required to develop the 50 microT field. At frequencies other than 60 Hz, the field strength was maintained at 50 microT by adjusting the Telulex signal output to keep the current constant. The field generated was monitored using a 10 turn coil connected to an oscilloscope. The oscilloscope reading indicated that the field strength was the same at all frequencies tested. To determine if there was a correspondence between the signals detected by a fluxgate magnetometer (FGM1) and the Toftness Sensometer both devices were placed in the Merritt coil and readings were recorded from the FGM1 and compared with the ability of a highly experienced Toftness operator to detect the 50 microT field.
The optimal ameliorating effects upon experimental allergic encephalomyelitis for both the derived intensities (about 35 and 70 nT) and the frequency (7 Hz) were congruent with the empirical observations from previously published and unpublished experiments with rats involving about 1-5000 nT strengths of either 0.5, 7, 40, or 60 Hz magnetic fields. The hypothesis predicts that weaker magnetic fields within the nanoTesla to picoTesla range would optimally affect concentrations of melatonin (in this situation) within the micromolar range and that neurological states (epilepsy) or conditions (ethanol, antidepressants, sleep deprivation) that affect nocturnal melatonin levels in human beings would determine the optimal effective intensity within the 7 Hz range.
Three of the patterns (25 Hz, 50 Hz, or burst-firing) with intensities between 1 and 10 microT were presented for 1 s during the refutation process (immediately after the offset of “true” or “false”) for specific statements from a total of 28 statements. The fourth pattern was a variable approximately 7–10 Hz (10 nT) field generated from the circuitry that was present continuously during the entire experiment. When the statements were presented again, the groups who had received the burst-firing (“limbic”) or 25 Hz pulsed magnetic fields during the refutation process accepted about twice the number of false statements as true compared to those exposed to the 50 Hz field or sham-field conditions. Read More: informahealthcare.com...
Female Lewis rats (n = 88) were inoculated with an emulsion of spinal cord and complete Freund's adjuvant. They were then exposed in 11 separate blocks of experiments over a year period for approximately 6 min every hour between midnight and 08:00 h during post-inoculation nights 1–7, 8–16, 1–16, or 9 and 10 to 50-nT, 7-Hz, amplitude-modulated magnetic fields or to sham field (control) conditions. Compared to the control rats those exposed to the magnetic fields for nights 1–7 and nights 9–10 displayed more severe clinical symptoms while those exposed for nights 1–16 or 8–16 showed less severe symptoms. There was a strong correlation between the severity of the clinical symptoms in the control groups and the global geomagnetic activity 9 and 10 days after inoculation. These results suggest that the immunosuppressive effects of weak nocturnal magnetic fields may depend upon when they are applied during various stages in the development of a disease.
They were then exposed for approximately 6 min every hour between midnight and 08:00 h for 2 weeks to either 7 or 40 Hz amplitude-modulated magnetic fields whose temporal pattern was designed to simulate a (geomagnetic) storm sudden commencement. The peak strengths of the fields averaged between either 30–50 nT (low intensity) or 500 nT (high intensity). Rats exposed to the 7 Hz, low intensity magnetic fields displayed significantly less severe overt signs of experimental allergic encephalomyelitis than rats exposed to either of the two intensities of the 40 Hz fields, the high intensity 7 Hz field, or the reference (
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
Clearly the B.S.er was confused when he had a hissy-fit about the magnetometer not reading changes in frequency while the B.S.er disregarded that the Tesla intensity was intentionally not changed.
RESULTS:
The triaxial fluxgate magnetometer was determined to be moderately responsive to changes in magnetic field frequency below 10 Hz. At frequencies above 10 Hz the readings corresponded to that of the ambient static geofield. The practitioner operating the Toftness Sensometer was unable to detect magnetic fields at high frequencies (above 10 Hz) even at very high EMFs. The fluxgate magnetometer was shown to be essentially a DC/static magnetic field detector and like all such devices it has a limited frequency range with some low level of sensitivity at very low field frequencies. The interexaminer reliability of four Toftness practitioners using the Sensometer on 5 patients showed low to moderate correlation.
CONCLUSIONS:
The fluxgate magnetometer although highly sensitive to static (DC) EMFs has only limited sensitivity to EMFs in the range of 1 to 10 Hz and is very insensitive to frequencies above 10 Hz. In laboratory comparisons of the Sensometer and the fluxgate magnetometer there was an occasional correspondence between the two instruments in detecting magnetic fields within the Merritt coil but these occasions were not reproducible.
we have measured that the magnetic field gets stronger by 3.1 nanotesla for each ◦C the temperature falls, and gets stronger by 2.3 nanotesla for each extra miliHertz of frequency.
Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
O.K. so there we have 2.3 nanotesla for each milihertz.
So again the milihertz is the frequency of the nanotesla