http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m72428.html
Re: CS>Re: SO>Frequency and the meaning of words.
From: Jim Meissner
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 13:31:41
> Dear Mike:
> Thank you, thank you, thank you, for providing the link to the
> source of the "Urban Legend" about frequencies of the human body,
> essential oils, and herbs.
You are very, very, very welcome:)
> What a scam, taking a junky cheap digital frequency counter that
> sell new for $204.75 and packaging that with bull shit and selling
> it for $2800.00!
Where on earth did you find the url? I googled for an hour and came
up empty. I was trying to find the datasheet and specifications - if
you have the url, please post it!!!
> The sad part is that many of my friends and other well meaning
> individuals like Christine are perpetuating this scam not knowing
> that they have been conned.
Yes, this is very true. Non-technical people are easily persuaded.
> It is interesting that the quote "the meter is being used at Johns
> Hopkins University" is denied by Bruce Tainio in the frequently
> asked questions section.
I think he's pretty clever in the ways he gives himself wiggle room.
> Christine made a statement that she is not a techie. Well, Bruce
> Tainio is not a techie either. He is a biologist who seems to have
> no clue about the operation of electronic instruments. The way he
> uses the frequency counter is as a random number generator,
> picking up all sorts of interference. The only way this test could
> be run would be in a screen room. I have worked in screen rooms
> where all the interference has been eliminated and have never
> measured a signal coming from the human body.
There is none. If there were, we would have to get a license from
the FCC, and always be careful to keep our emotions under control so
we don't go outside our assigned frequency band. Of course, there
would have to be a special frequency allotment in the case of death.
> A funny situation may have developed at Young Living Essential
> Oils. The reason I was not able to get the frequency test
> equipment used to test their essential oils might be because they
> discovered that they had been scammed and are now locked into the
> frequency scam and cannot back out. Funny if that is the case. How
> could they extricate themselves without looking like fools.
> Again, thank you for the links to the Bruce Tainio web site. This
> has bothered me for years and suspected that it was a scam. I
> wonder whether Bruce is knowingly pulling a fast one or whether he
> simply does not understand what he is doing.
> Jim Meissner www.MeissnerResearch.com
Thanks for your interesting comments, Jim.
I think Bruce knows he is scamming people. First, he emphasizes the
problems with outside interference in numerous places, such as:
"What makes this frequency meter unique is it's extremely
sensitive sensor..."
http://www.tainio.com/ir/frqmonitor/index.htm
and
"Unless you find yourself on a deserted Pacific island, the signal
you intend to measure is not the only one reaching the counter's
sensor. Once the sensor is attached to the counter, every signal
besides the one of interest becomes a source of interference and
the second sensitivity limitation. The level of these incidental
signals can be quite large, in fact, and usually is the limiting
factor in bio-frequency measurement."
http://www.tainio.com/ir/frqmonitor/instruct.htm
These statements give him plenty of wiggle room in case of legal
problems.
A second item is the Concerto RFI/EMI eliminator:
http://www.tainio.com/ir/concerto/graph.htm
If such an instrument could be built, there would be no need for
screen rooms such as you worked in. If the Concerto worked as
claimed, companies would buy it instead of paying big bucks for a
screen room. But they don't.
A third item is the calculations on Johnson Noise:
"USE:"
"This frequency counter is subject to two fundamental limitations
in it's sensitivity. The first is the noise of the electrons
moving through the circuitry of the counter input circuitry. For a
typical 3GHz bandwidth front end, this results in input noise
floor of about -70dBm. Since any desired signal to be counted must
exceed this level by 10 - 15dB so the counter can reliably count
zero crossings, the limiting sensitivity is -44 to -60dBm. This
figure is approached by this counter when operated in a laboratory
environment, but there is another, more limiting factor when
attempting to count radiated signals using the special designed
bio-frequency sensor."
http://www.tainio.com/ir/frqmonitor/instruct.htm
By the time you get to calculating Johnson noise, you are pretty
knowledgeable on circuit theory and electronics. So you know what
you are selling could not possible work as claimed.
Just for fun, let's go through the calculations and verify Bruce's
accuracy. For that, we'll need an equation solver called Mercury,
written by Roger Schafley, who also wrote Borland's Eureka.
Go to the following url
http://archives.math.utk.edu/software/msdos/calculus/mrcry209/index.html
and download
http://archives.math.utk.edu/software/msdos/calculus/mrcry209/mrcry209.zip
The nice thing about using this solver is you don't have to rewrite
all the equations when you want to solve for a different unknown.
You just enter the conversion factors, then enough known variables
to solve the equations. Mercury will rewrite the equations as needed
to solve for the unknowns. This saves a lot of time tracking down
silly math errors:)
Anyway, here are the conversion factors for Johnson Noise:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
; Johnson Noise Calculations
; Bw = Noise bandwidth in Hertz (f max - f min)
; Erms = Thermal noise voltage in Volts rms
; Irms = Thermal noise current in Amps rms
; kB = Boltzmann's constant (1.38 x 10-23 J/K)
; R = Resistance in ohms
; T = Absolute temperature (Kelvin)
dbm = 10 * log10(Pwr / 1e-3)
Epwr = Erms^2 / R
IPwr = Irms^2 * R
Erms = sqrt(4 * kB * T * R * Bw) ; thermal noise in uv rms
Irms = sqrt((4 * kB * T * Bw) / R) ; current noise
kB = 1.38054e-23 ; Boltzmann's constant (1.38 x 10-23)
Pwr = Erms * Irms
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is what we know:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bw = 3e9 ; bandwidth in Hz
R = 50 ; resistance in ohms
T = 290 ; temp degrees Kelvin
--------------------------------------------------------------------
And here is the solution:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
dbm = -73.183
Erms = +4.9011E-05
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So the thermal noise signal in a 50 ohm resistor and 3GHz bandwidth
is -73dBm, or 49 microvolts rms at room temperature.
Now a typical wideband amplifier will have a noise figure of
anywhere from 2dB to 5 or even 10 dB. If we take a figure of 3dB, we
get
-73dBm + 3dB = -70dBm
Bruce states:
"For a typical 3GHz bandwidth front end, this results in input
noise floor of about -70dBm."
So we have nailed his calculation exactly.
Next, he shows he understands the signal-to-noise ratio needed to
get reliable triggering (even though his math is a bit off:)
"Since any desired signal to be counted must exceed this level by
10 - 15dB so the counter can reliably count zero crossings, the
limiting sensitivity is -44 to -60dBm."
It should read "-55 to -60dBm". But that's not important. The
significant thing is he clearly understands how the system measures
its own noise, or stray signals that happen to be in the vicinity.
He knows there are no signals from the body, or plants, or bottles
of oil, or lumps of soil. A clear scam.
Just to round thing off, there's more things you can do with
Mercury. Here's the Faraday equations for Silver electrolysis:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
; Colloidal Silver Calculations Bob Lee's method
C = I * sec ; total number of Coulombs
den = I / sqin ; current density Amperes per sq in
ele = I / 1.60217733e-19; electrons per second
gm = k * I * sec ; Faraday's equation
isn = isq / 6.45e14 ; ions per square nanometer per sec
isq = ele / sqin ; ions per sq. in. per sec
k = 107.868 / 96485 ; Coulombs required per gram of silver
lt = 3.785 * gal ; convert gallons to litres
lt = ml / 1000 ; convert millilitres to litres
mg = gm * 1000 ; convert grams to milligrams
ml = 29.57 * oz ; convert ounce to milliliters
phr = ppm / hrs ; ppm per hour
ppm = mg / lt ; 1 ppm is 1 milligram per litre
sec = hrs * 3600 ; convert hours to seconds
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a sample calculation for the Roby Flow Through CS Generator:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
gal = 360
hrs = 1
mnt = 0 ; minutes
ppm = 30 ; target ppm
sqin = 4 ; wetted area (estimated)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
and here's the solution:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Cou = 36564.262153743
gal = 360
gm = 40.878
hrs = 1.0000
I = 10.156
lt = 1362.6
mg = 40878
oz = 46080
ppm = 30
uAin = 2539184.87
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This shows he would have to run at a current of 10 amps to generate
30ppm in 360 gallons in 1 hr. He is obviously wrong. Another scam.
If you are interested in copper electrolysis, the conversion factor
changes since copper is double ionized and has a different atomic
weight:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Cou = I * sec ; total number of Coulombs
esec = I / 1.60217733e-19; electrons per second
gm = k * I * sec ; Faraday's equation
isin = esec / sqin ; ions per sq. in. per sec
isnm = isin / 6.45e14 ; ions per square nanometer per sec
k = 0.5* 63.5 / 96485 ; Coulombs required per gram of copper
lt = 3.785 * gal ; convert gallons to litres
lt = ml / 1000 ; convert millilitres to litres
mg = gm * 1000 ; convert grams to milligrams
ml = 29.57 * oz ; convert ounce to milliliters
phr = ppm / hrs ; ppm per hour
ppm = mg / lt ; 1 ppm is 1 milligram per litre
sec = hrs * 3600 + mnt * 60 ; convert hours to seconds
uAin = 1e6 * I / sqin ; current density in uA per sq in
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So Mercury makes it easy to do quick calculations and verify or
debunk different claims.
Best Wishes,
Mike Monett
--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org
To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com
Silver List archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
Address Off-Topic messages to: silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com
OT Archive: http://escribe.com/health/silverofftopiclist/index.html
List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com>
