Royal Rife Thread

Philo_T

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Messages
1,213
Reaction score
15
Points
69
I tried searching the FTMB, but didn't find an existing thread on this person.

Royal Raymond Rife was an inventor that built a optical microscope with a magnification of 60,000x with which he claimed he could view live viruses. (This in itself is a pretty big claim!!)

He claimed that he had discovered that each type of micro-organism had a specific (visual) frequency associated with it. And that this could be used in identifying specimens. (Whether this was a artifact of how his microscope operated is unclear.)

In his further research, he claimed that each organism had a specific resonant frequency (or combination of frequencies) that could be used to destroy it. This eventually led him to claim that he had found a cure for cancer.

Rife's work pointed in the direction of a new science of electromedicine and inevitably led to clashes with the establisment medical community. Naturally, such a contriversial fringe scientist has a web following. For instance : http://www.rife.org/index.html
 

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
4,463
Reaction score
5,631
Points
234
Philo T said:
Royal Raymond Rife was an inventor that built a optical microscope with a magnification of 60,000x with which he claimed he could view live viruses. (This in itself is a pretty big claim!!)
Hmm, certainly is! As they are smaller than the wavelength of visible light n' all. Would lead me to believe other claims might be a wee bit fishy too.

Actually I tell a lie, I had forgotten about this one.:)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2895165.stm
 

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
4,463
Reaction score
5,631
Points
234
Viruses can be photographed with an electron microscope and then coloured afterwards. Electron microscopes use a beam of electrons rather than light but other than that I don't know much about them.
 

Philo_T

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Messages
1,213
Reaction score
15
Points
69
That's the thing about Rife's "microscope". He was claiming that he could view things that are smaller than a visible light wavelength -- something that's theoretically impossible. Extrordinary claims and all that... But if the thing did somehow work, obviously he was onto something that mainstream optics was unaware of.

Yes, most likely, Rife was deluded and couldn't properly operate a microscope. This is at least Fortean from the "kook file" aspect. But what if his claims had some merit? One reason I started this thread was that I was interested in whether anyone had attempted to reproduce his findings.
 

tzb57r

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
May 15, 2002
Messages
137
Reaction score
4
Points
49
You can’t “see” things with a size less than the wavelength of the viewing photon. So you can’t “see” busses with radio waves, but you can see them with Radar. As many viruses have diameters less than the wavelength of Blue light they are invisible to the visible spectrum and thus he was beyond the physical limit of a visible microscope.

Viruses, can be viewed with electron microscopes (where the wavelength of the wave can be varied with the voltage of the microscope) and indeed they are actually pretty big to be viewed with these types of instruments. When very large objects are imaged using electron microscopes they first have to be coated in a monolayer of gold; so the Ant in the famous “ant carrying a microchip” image was stone dead, posed and then covered in gold. One for the Ant Liberation Front to complain about.

In X-ray crystallography x-ray photons in the x10^-10m (Angstrom) range are used to construct an image of the virus at the chemical bond scale. If viruses do have a resonant frequency this would be fascinating, but I don’t believe they are rigid enough to make this happen. They are pretty pliable things that are FULL of water, if there is a frequency at which you kill viruses then it is with the H-O-H frequency microwaves that you use to heat food, unfortunately this also heats the patient.

The problem with this type of radiation approach is that the viruses are composed of the same stuff we are, protein, lipids, DNA/RNA and lots of water. Whatever you try to destroy in the virus, you can be certain you will also destroy in the host. (X-ray treatment of tumours uses multiple beams that all have the tumour as the only common point of intersection to minimise the damage to surrounding tissues while maximising the dose in the tumour). The best tactic for viruses is to use something that tackles a protein that is exclusive to the virus and not the host. This is easy with bacteria which are much larger and have fully independent biochemistries but viruses hijack so much of the host’s biochemistry that finding those unique targets is a real bitch. They also mutate at such a rate in comparison to bacteria that finding a target site that will remain stable over several years is also difficult.

Unfortunately it is not possible to “photograph” atoms or molecules. What you see are constructs based on either x-ray crystallographic results or in the case of individual atoms on a surface then these are done using tunnelling-electron-microscopes. (these are based on the ability of an electron to “tunnel” i.e. be one place and then someplace else without passing though the space in between)

I will stop there, as I did my Ph.D. in Theoretical X-Ray Crystallography and I am even more tedious on this subject than I am normally.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Your Phd was in X-ray Crystallography?

I am impressed; how are your fingers?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Royal Rife

Mythopoeika said:
I'm sure I've seen a photograph of a virus, years ago.
It's even possible to photograph molecules and individual atoms.
Not with an optical microscope it's not. As others have said, you cannot see anything smaller than the wavelength of visible light, however powerful your optical microscope.

Seems that when Right Royal Rife was making these claims, he was not talking out of his mouth.
 

MrSnowman

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
874
Reaction score
14
Points
49
Picking up on the resonant frequencies (RF) of certain cells/virii/things; I was idly entertaining this idea a few weeks ago (before seeing this article.. I'm ded clevvur U no) whilst having my usual lunch break thinking session.

The science, as I see it, revolves around the concept of a malignant mass having the same RF throughout it's structure, and the establishing of this frequency to within the tiniest of hertz (so as not to damage any surrounding healthy cells with a similar RF), and then subjecting the erm.. subject to a prolonged dose of the sound (for an as-yet unestablished time period (long enough to have an effect, obviously)) which would cause the mass to turn to slop, and dissipate into the body. The audio dissembling of the dna and rna structures would prevent migration of nastiness to other parts of the body after the process had taken place.

I think, anyway.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I pretty well understand how optical microscopes work, and I used to be familiar with ones found in labs.


Looking at the microscopes page, does anyone know what all the 'Heath Robinson' contraption is around the slide carrier is? Seems damned complex for a straight optical microscope
 

austen27

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 9, 2001
Messages
1,187
Reaction score
12
Points
69
Hugo Cornwall said:
I pretty well understand how optical microscopes work, and I used to be familiar with ones found in labs.


Looking at the microscopes page, does anyone know what all the 'Heath Robinson' contraption is around the slide carrier is? Seems damned complex for a straight optical microscope
I suspect we are looking at some sort of high powered torch beam that could be angled onto the subject. Sort of the 1930s equivalent of a laser pointer. I also suspect Rife was seeing very bright highlights through his microscope that, due to poor optics, looked loke tiny disks. I think what he called viruses are similar to what people with diital cameras call "orbs".
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The blurb seems to imply some for of phase shifting of wave lenght so ultrashort wavelenghts become visible...

Were victorian optics that dicey?
 

austen27

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 9, 2001
Messages
1,187
Reaction score
12
Points
69
Hugo Cornwall said:
The blurb seems to imply some for of phase shifting of wave lenght so ultrashort wavelenghts become visible...

Were victorian optics that dicey?
I think there is a big technical challenge in correcting for chromatic abberation. If Rife didn't know exactly what he was doing his subject would have been in foucus at one wavelenght and blurred at another, again giving a blobby appearence.

Victorian (and some later) camera lenses suffered from chromatic abberation, but this didn't matter because old plates were often only sensitive to a narrow range of colours.
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
17,037
Reaction score
22,377
Points
309
Location
Out of Bounds
Rife's work remains controversial - most particularly the "beam ray" / vibrational medical treatment approaches for which he's best known. His legacy is complicated by ongoing uses of his name and terminology to promote and sell devices which don't seem to represent authentic applications of Rife's principles and designs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Rife
 

Bad Bungle

Dingo took my tray bake.
Joined
Oct 13, 2018
Messages
1,764
Reaction score
4,749
Points
154
Location
The Chilterns
Hmm, certainly is! As they are smaller than the wavelength of visible light n' all. Would lead me to believe other claims might be a wee bit fishy too.

Actually I tell a lie, I had forgotten about this one.:)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2895165.stm
Min, I've been looking for an update to that macro-virus since reading about it in 1992. Environmental Health Inspector finds the world's (then) biggest virus in a cooling tower and then absolutely nothing - as he goes off hawking it to seek fame and fortune.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,793
Reaction score
4,873
Points
234
He claimed that he had discovered that each type of micro-organism had a specific (visual) frequency associated with it. And that this could be used in identifying specimens.
Interestingly, I've been re-reading a great deal of (and about) Lethbridge, who had a very similar experience with pendulums, and could identify elements and substances according to the length of the string, the number of swings, etc. His own experimentation and findings on this and various other earth mysteries were the major reason for his separation from the wider archaeological community, but according to a number of independent witnesses he could demonstrate this quite consistently.
 
Top