Rife
machine?
A "Rife
machine" is a research instrument. It is
used by experimenters, both
practitioners and private users alike,
to influence the body in making chemical
changes. We use the term experimentation
deliberately, as that is exactly what
this is. This method has not been
approved in the US for treating illness
with humans. (It has, however, been
approved for use in veterinary
applications.)
A true
"Rife machine", of course, is one made
by Dr. Royal Rife himself. All others
must be considered Rife-type devices,
and are highly theoretical and
experimental in nature.
See
more here about Dr. Rife
Rife
type machines work on the principle of
sympathetic resonance, which states that
if there are two similar objects and one
of them is vibrating, the other will
begin to vibrate as well, even if they
are not touching. In the same way that a
sound wave can induce resonance in a
crystal glass and ultra-sound can be
used to break up kidney stones, a Rife
machine uses sympathetic resonance to
physically vibrate offending bacteria,
viruses and parasites resulting in their
destruction and elimination from the
body.
A
question always arises about the type of
signal that Rife used, and which one is
better. Any true Rife researcher will
agree, the most effective of these
devices will deliver an analog signal
(versus a digital signal). Analog is
better because it is in many ways a
"more natural" frequency. It includes
the sub-tones and overtones to the base
number, providing a maximized fullness,
essentially a richness of tonal
qualities. A very big part of that is
what is called the harmonics. An
audiophile understands this. Those who
desire only "true" sound on their stereo
systems insist on analog devices for
just this reason.
The
Analog vs. Digital Frequency Debate
The
current analog vs. digital discussion is
wrought with misconceptions and
disinformation. Such as, digitally
generated frequencies do not vary, which
implies that they do not have overtones
and undertones. This would only be true
if the frequencies remained digital.
That is why digital frequencies from DDS
(Direct Digital Synthesis) and DSP
(Digital Signal Processing) are
converted to analog before they are put
out of quality frequency generators.
These Digital-to-Analog Converters are
called a DAC for short. You can see in
the diagram below that a frequency comes
out of a DDS or a DSP looking like
stairs. The signal then goes through a
DAC or Digital-to-Analog Converter. Then
it goes through a Low-Pass or Bandpass
Filter to finish the analog conversion.
Now the frequency that you have is a
very accurate analog frequency with all
the overtones and undertones of that
analog frequency. The analog frequency
produced by a digital chip can be swept
up or down with more accuracy than any
old tube analog instrument. The most
important thing to remember is the
frequency has to be converted to analog
before it is output from the frequency
generator.

Digitally
produced frequencies converted to analog
are far superior to any signal that
comes from an old antique tube type
analog frequency generator. Antique tube
type generators are very limited. If I
want a frequency of 2128.5, an old tube
analog generator would not be accurate
enough to give me that frequency to use.
It could only give me 2128. Also
digitally converted frequencies allow me
to sweep with far more accuracy than old
analog tube type instruments. Even a
thousandth or millionth of a frequency
is possible even though this kind of
accuracy is not needed. This is
something that a purely analog
instrument could not do as accurately.
Digitally produced frequencies when
converted to analog can accurately
produce minute details. These analog
frequencies when converted to a square
wave waveform produce square wave
harmonics.
Some
claim that their instruments which
output analog frequencies produce
advanced analog harmonics, but this is
just sales hype. All the digital to
analog frequency generators on the
market today that have been tested with
a spectrum analyzer produce the same
analog harmonics. Anyone claiming to
have some form of superior advanced
square wave harmonics is just giving you
lots of sales hype. (Our frequency
generator uses this technology.)
Output
of contact or "pad" type instrument vs.
output of the RAY TUBE?
Contact
or "pad" type instruments deliver
frequencies through direct contact,
while ray tube instruments transmit
frequencies indirectly through the air.
Direct contact makes it possible to get
the full energy into the body without
power loss. Indirect contact though a
ray tube is very efficient as long as
you keep the ray tube within several
inches of the body.
The laws
of physics in regards to signal loss
come into play when using a ray tube. It
requires much more power at the
frequencies to deliver its output. For
every foot that you move the ray tube
away from the body you have to divide
the power output by the ray tube by a
factor of 4. If you have 50 watts (power
level used by Dr. Rife’s 1934
instrument) of power coming out of a ray
tube then at one foot away from the ray
tube you only have 12.5 watts. At two
feet you only have 3.125 watts and at 3
feet you only have about .78 of a watt.
Because of this loss Dr. Rife had the
doctors who used the instruments stay
within 6 to 12 inches of the body with
the ray tube. Today many ray tube
instruments output about 100 watts or
more. Their manufacturers recommend
those who use them to stay at least 3
feet away from the ray tube. At one foot
away from the ray tube you only have 25
watts. At two feet you only have 6.25
watts and at 3 feet you only have about
1.56 of a watt.
With a
direct contact instrument this power
loss is not a problem; therefore, one
does not need to use anywhere near the
same power levels used by a ray tube
instrument. This is the benefit of a
contact instrument. Another benefit is
you don't have to worry about other
frequencies in the air (phones, tv,
radio, computer, etc..) interfering with
your chosen frequency. (Our frequency
generator uses pad technology, and also
has optional beam ray power that is used
with the pads to avoid signal loss as
described above.)
Background of the contact or pad
instrument
The first
contact instrument was built in 1957 by
John Crane and John Marsh. The ray tube
instruments were very expensive to build
and they wanted to build smaller
instruments that would be less
expensive. Even today many ray tube
instruments are three times more
expensive than pad instruments. John
Crane and John Marsh took an
off-the-shelf frequency generator and
hooked up pads to it. These first pad
instruments worked quite well but were
underpowered like most of the pad
instruments built today. They tried to
overcome the power problem with larger
pads. Because the off-the-shelf
generator didn’t have a carrier
frequency they no longer used one. This
was important. Without the RF carrier
frequency, they couldn’t duplicate the
same results as the ray tube instrument.
(Our generator uses one of Dr. Rife's
own RF carrier waves.)
Power
Output Is Important In A Frequency
Generator
When
comparing various instruments, power
output is a very important
consideration. The first pad instrument
developed by John Crane and John Marsh
worked quite well but were underpowered
like most of the pad instruments built
today. The power output of pad
instruments on the market today that do
not use an RF carrier frequency is only
about 0.20 of 1 watt. Our frequency
generator outputs 2 full watts.
Why do
the instruments built today only use low
audio frequencies when Dr. Rife’s
original frequencies were much higher?
The FCC
(Federal Communication Commission) is
the reason why. In 1935 Congress created
the FCC and by 1936 they began to
regulate the airwaves. Before 1935 there
were no regulations to prevent Dr. Rife
from using his high frequencies output
through a ray tube. The frequencies
output through the ray tube would travel
about 12 miles in each direction from
his laboratory. Dr. Rife said his
equipment would “raise the devil” with
all the radios. In 1936 Dr. Rife’s
engineer, Philip Hoyland built the first
audio frequency instrument. From this
time on Dr. Rife’s original high
frequencies were no longer used in any
of the equipment. This of course made it
so his instrument was not as effective.
In the 1950s Dr. Rife, John Crane and
John Marsh continued to build this low
audio frequency instrument. Today’s
modern instruments were patterned after
this low audio frequency instrument.
Hi Chad:
Hope this finds you doing well.....I saw
my oncologist in Omaha last week and she
is certain that I AM IN REMISSION! To
that I say, "Thank you Jesus!" She has
decided that NO MORE CHEMO would be a
good thing for me - and I agree because
this last cycle was very difficult -
still fighting side effects.... I am
using the Rife machine and at a lesser
time as well...." Jo W. (August 08)
"Hi Nina, I
am making very good progress. I love the
products you sent me. In fact I need 2
more VIBE. I'll have more to tell you as
time goes on. I've been doing the rife
generator, and believe I am making great
progress. I cancelled my surgery for Feb
1st. I have about another week on the
parasite/kidney cleanses, Then, I will
start the liver cleanse....." - Bernice
A., Indiana (from June 07. As of August
08 still no surgery and no more tumors.)
"....let me
put it this way: my cancer is under
control as far as the main growth (the
bladder) is concerned, and in fact it is
GONE from the prostate and the lower
intestine. It has instead spread
slightly into the bones creating a few
more lesions than I had thought possible
as I feel FAR BETTER than most of the
cancer patients taking Taxol. I am
therefore taking no chances: I have to
give credit for reducing the main growth
to a point where it's barely visible on
the scans (as of Wednesday just past) to
Dr. Clark's regimen of cleansing and
supplements and/or to the Rife box I am
using...." - Luigi (from 2001, still
cancer free)
"Thank you
again Nina. After finishing the parasite
cleanse, my son's CEA counts dropped to
near perfect levels. After the liver
flush, he counted literally hundreds of
stones! His appetite and strength began
to return, and shortly after we added
the rife machine sessions, his cancer
was completely gone!...." - Dominic D.
San Diego 2004
Note:
personal testimonies are not scientific
evidence.