Double Trouble Frequencies in search of what is safe and what is not biologically safe for use in modern communication systems by Dr Chris Barnes, Manager at Bangor Scientific and Educational Consultants E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org
The work of Geesink and Meijer in relation to frequency aspects of their proposed bio-soliton quantum RNA replicator is discussed and expanded upon by considering the notions of primordial input of planetary Schumann resonance and atmospheric Microwave protection at water, hydroxyl and hydrogen frequencies to predict DNA structure, chirality and which broadcasting frequencies are unsafe. The hypothesis is tested by showing these are the very frequencies present to excess at houses and buildings wherein cancer sufferers are living or have lived. A list of the potentially most unsafe frequencies is calculated and disclosed. Specific support is given to Hallberg and Johansson’s observation of strong epidemiological association between Melanoma and FM broadcasting. In a specific Melanoma case examined RF activation of the yeast cell cycle may have added to Candidiasis loading of the Melanoma concerned. This short paper goes a long way to clearing up the mystery as to why there has been so much conflict over the effects of RF radiation and Biosystems. Subtle changes in frequency (and modulation scheme) which also equally counts as frequency via the context of information in a quantum coherent system accounting for the manifold different observations in the literature. Other aspects not discussed here are phase application aspects which I have discussed elsewhere in relation to critical antenna distances. Furthermore, it is my belief that power windowing in these systems can be accounted for by ion cyclotron like effects or by immune T-cell/ APC spatio-temporal statistical probability considerations of the type discussed by Lauer. Briefly the conclusion is a bit like an ‘animal farm’ all frequencies are ‘equal’ but some are more equal (dangerous) than others. That danger can and has been and doubtless will also continue also to be exploited and used as a double edged sword as more and more frequency based cancer treatments are developed. Likewise, as I have predicted in some of my previous papers, safer communication and broadcasting systems will ultimately have to be developed. This work shows also that neither task will be impossible.
Very recently indeed two very revealing publications have appeared which offer food for thought not only about our origins as a human species but also on every level our interaction with the Universe around us.
First, is the observation that there are possible specific modulated radio frequencies which appear capable, at lease in a few cases, to cause the stasis or regression of certain types of cancerous tumour, see Zimmerman et al, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3845545/
Second is the paper of Geesink and Meijer
Which offers a bio-soliton explanation on the origins of life at the surface of certain types of primordial clathrate. But moreover elicits Frolich’s quantum coherence model of biological systems and provides a set of effective frequencies rather akin to the notion of the Bose-Einstein condensate.
The paper then goes on to ascribe these condensate frequencies as somehow intrinsically biologically safe (life stabilising) on the basis of over a hundred references in the scientific literature. Further it goes on to describe a set of frequencies in-between these condensate frequencies as inherently life de-stabilising on the basis of a much smaller quotient of scientific evidence. In the fact of reality, many of the references the paper cites can neither be readily found nor have had the correct conclusion drawn. Nevertheless, the purpose of this comment is not to deflate the paper in general. It is clearly the product of two excellent minds and offers me, the present author, a chance to expand in search of what is safe and what is not biologically safe for use in modern communication systems.
Figure 1: Beneficial and Detrimental Frequencies ( only according to Geesink and Meijer)
Further, I can accept the notion of the clathrate as an RNA replicator. However, modern life also features DNA. Very controversial as it may seem Dr Mae Wam Ho claims that DNA sequences can be reconstituted from electromagnetic water memory, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/DNA_sequence_reconstituted_from_Water_Memory.php.
It is my view that the further development of the origins of life can be reconciled if we have both the frequency provision of the clathrates and the only other primordial frequency provisions that were around at the time i.e. Earth and the other planetary system’s Schuman resonance frequencies. An incredible sensitivity to these frequencies would have been displayed due to the tiny field strengths involved. For example power levels generated in coherently communicating cells are estimated to be as low as 10^-18 Watt and never higher than about 10^-10 Watt and in terms of received sensitivity changes in Earth’s magnetic field we are at pico-tesla levels here.
An intriguing, almost creation like facet, is that when these frequencies are introduced into the equation they fit almost exactly into specific slots on the clathrate replicator condensate frequency scale or, and equally as importantly into some but not all of the slots in-between, some of those from hereon I shall refer to as anti-condensate frequencies.
It is further my guess that the natural asymmetry provided, a preference for a dominance (5:4) of clathrate frequencies but not 100% could have somehow been instrumental in the substitution of Thymine for Uracil and the preference for L-amino chirality that we see in life today.
It is thus my present hypothesis that any extraneous frequencies which have even sub-harmonics or even harmonics which disturb the below frequencies labelled ‘SR’ could be particularly deleterious. Thus perhaps the frequencies labelled ‘SR’ are the true life stabilising frequencies but because of their intrinsically very sensitive development we could not expect the application of external frequency to further ‘stabilise’ them. There will even be expected to be added tiers of complexity such as the satisfaction of phase relationships and power windowing which is also reported in frequency- biology interaction.
Figure 2: Condensate and Anti-condensate frequencies which coincide with natural planetary Schumann resonance mainly of Earth but also of Venus, Saturn, Jupiter and Titan.
Just as life developed provided by certain frequencies, equally importantly, it also developed shielded from certain deleterious frequencies in which case with such processes there must have been an absolutely delicate balance between frequency input leaking past the attenuator/shield and the clathrate input. Generally, protection was from excess U/V radiation by the atmosphere but more specifically from certain microwave frequencies entering earth’s environment as broad band radiation from the Sun and Galactic Cosmos. Such narrow -band of protection are/were offered by microwave absorption of water, OH- and Hydrogen. One can factor in these protected frequencies wherein the development of life must have depended on absolutely critical balance.
Figure 3: Frequencies of figure 2 above but also showing atmosphere ‘protected’ frequencies.
Of particular note are the condensate frequencies; 324 and 432 Hz which have a three-way balance between clathrate replicator input, Schumann resonance input and microwave mediated (narrow band protected) input. Also of particular note are the anti-condensate frequencies 332.6 and 374.4 which have a two-way balance between SR input and microwave protection.
My present hypothesis thus further proposes that if these specific condensates are disturbed by application of extraneous frequency (or a greater proportion of them) bio-damage including the possibly of cancer is a possible result.
Testing the Hypothesis
The above hypothesis predicts that there should be frequencies in use by broadcasters and for mobile communications that have deleterious effects on us and plants and animals (bio-damage) but equally that there should be frequencies which are innocuous.
There are two ways of testing the hypothesis. Firstly, one can look at existing scientific literature and results of various biological studies including those on employment epidemiology, geospatial epidemiology around TV towers and the like, animal studies, plant studies and in vitro cell culture studies and the like. Secondly, one can organise one’s own frequency studies using real time frequency spectrum analysis at buildings and locations where cancer sufferers live or have lived recently.
Further by combined the results of experimentation on specific frequencies found in the literature and specific cancer cases it is possible to get some idea as to whether the radio frequency environment may have acted as an initiator of cancer or a promoter or both.
Figure 4: Some common cancer associated frequencies
A number of common frequencies were found to be present at buildings/ locations wherein cancer victims either presently live or lived prior to their demise. The ‘effects’ of each common frequency have been collated through trawling thorough literally hundreds of published works (too many to reference here in this short paper) and deducing a majority/consensus effect for each frequency. This is because rarely do all the published works agree. Take just one frequency for example 900 MHz GSM (condensate 429) wherein some 35 % of the experiments report ROS (free radical or reactive oxygen species effects), another 35% reports membrane transport effects, 17% report mitotic spindle effects, 8 % report no or neutral effect, 4% report tetragenic effect and the remainder proliferation effects.
Drop the frequency just slightly to 835.62 MHz and all experiments report no biological effects, equivalent to a frequency between the two Calcium channel results above.
Drop the frequency further to 800 MHz and most experiments report aneuploidy.
At other frequencies mitochondrial ATP is reportedly disturbed.
Thus the findings in the literature are generally in line with the highly quantised frequency windowing effects predicted by the present hypothesis.
Specific Cancer Cases considered in more detail
The cases of Brain, Breast and Colon cancer in the table are instructive. All three victims are/were non-smokers and did not drink alcohol to excess. It would appear that here RF radiation, purely because of the chance combination of frequencies arising had the potential to be both initiator and promoter of cancer. Indeed, at the premises of the breast cancer sufferer there are no fewer than 5 different frequency sources all active on or close to the 374.4 Hz cell cycle frequency. There were also 3 such frequencies active at the home of the colon cancer sufferer wherein there was also a case cat cancer.
In homes where no cancer sufferers have been noted there are usually no or maybe just frequency active here. Turning to the case of Larynx cancer. This was very close to the case of Colon cancer but only one frequency associated with Oncogene induction was found. The victim was a heavy smoker and drinker of hard liquor both of which would have also contributed to the demise.
At the home of the lung cancer sufferer frequencies were present which could have led to promotion but most probably heavy smoking was a likely initiator.
The case of Melanoma is particularly interesting. Candidiasis is often found in association with Melanoma. A specific DVB frequency was found which in condensate form accelerates growth of Candida. Cancer cell promotion could follow as a result the Cell Cycle frequencies provided. Hallberg and Johansson have discussed Melanoma and FM broadcasting at length. There are several references ( ) refs. Basically they show that the European explosion of Melanoma only began after about 1955 when FM broadcasting began. The incidence of melanoma has been increasing steadily in many countries since 1960, but the underlying mechanism causing this increase remains elusive. They linked melanoma incidence to the distance to frequency modulation (FM) broadcasting towers. In one of their studies they sought to determine if there was also a related link on a larger scale for entire countries. Exposure-time-specific incidence was extracted from exposure and incidence data from 4 different countries, and this was compared with reported age-specific incidence of melanoma. Geographic differences in melanoma incidence were compared with the magnitude of FM broadcasting as an environmental stress. The exposure-time-specific incidence from all 4 countries became almost identical, and they were approximately equal to the reported age-specific incidence of melanoma. A correlation between melanoma incidence and the number of locally receivable FM transmitters was found. Thus they concluded that melanoma is associated with exposure to FM broadcasting.
The centre frequency of the cell cycle condensate 374.4 Hz coincides with 98.114 MHz, a frequency close to the centre of the FM broadcasting band. It is believed thus that the present work more firmly cements the link that Hallberg and Johansson have established.
It would appear from the study of all the above cancers that potentially radio signals which have Euclid’s element sub-harmonics which fall at or close to 374.4 Hz are the most dangerous of all to human life.
Dangerous frequencies in reality
It is very instructive to translate the dangerous cell cycle condensate into meaningful RF transmission frequencies. Following Geesink, it is considered that frequencies within about +/- 1.5% may also be dangerous. The list becomes
23.938 KHz Close to US Submarine communication frequency – stronger at night
191.5 KHz LW Broadcast
393 KHz LF Radio Navigation Beacons http://www.dxinfocentre.com/ndb.htm (nearest in UK London)
766.75 and 1535.5 KHz MW Broadcast
3.067 and 6.134 and 12. 268 and 24.563 MHz SW Broadcast – sparse use
49.772 MHz (edge of 6m Ham Radio Band is at 50 MHz) -sparse use
98.144 +/- 1.5 MHz Many stations in VHF FM broadcast -24/7
196.288 +/- 3 MHz – OLD BAND 3 TV Broadcast frequency – not in use now- May have trunked radio communication systems in some areas.
392.576 +/- 5.85 MHz TETRA EMERGENCY SERVICE BROADCAST 24/7
785.152 +/- 11.77 MHz DVB TV and 4G in some areas – 24/7
12.56 +/- .195 GHz Satellite TV Broadcasting -24/7
It is rather ironic that this most dangerous of frequencies covers so many well-known broadcast and communications channels. Yet future broadcast spectrum re-design would not be impossible once there is sufficient understanding of and motivation form this work.
Clearly it would appear that there are specific frequencies which have been around since the dawn of time which control in quantum mechanical manner the delicate balance of life and its ability to create order (negative entropy) from chaos in non or quasi-equilibrium scenarios.
Further clearly, it would appear one upsets these at one’s own risk.
Cancer cells have numerous and notable differences form healthy cells. For example, they have Young’s modulus between two and ten times lower than normal cells depending on the particular line. One would expect then intuitively cancer as a system to have different vibrational modes from healthy tissue.
It is noted that four of the five so called tumour treating frequencies revealed by (ref) also fit directly onto anti-condensate frequencies as defined by figure 2 above. Also that four out of these frequencies are protected from Microwaves by atmospheric absorption but not coincide with Schumann resonance frequencies. I believe this is to be expected as cancer is not a preferred state of life.
I cannot disclose more about my findings here as the rest of my work in this area is presently highly Confidential.
I am presently working on a formula to predict intrinsically safe or safer frequencies for broadcasting. Again there is are Confidential aspects attached and I cannot presently disclose the same.
Conclusions and Further work
This short paper goes a long way to clearing up the mystery as to why there has been so much conflict over the effects of RF radiation and Biosystems. Subtle changes in frequency (and modulation scheme) which also equally counts as frequency via the context of information in a quantum coherent system accounting for the manifold different observations in the literature. Other aspects not discussed here are phase application aspects which I have discussed elsewhere in relation to critical antenna distances. Furthermore, it is my belief that power windowing in these systems can be accounted for by ion cyclotron like effects or by immune Tcell APC statistical probability considerations of the type discussed by Lauer.
Briefly the conclusion is a bit like an ‘animal farm’ all frequencies are ‘equal’ but some are more equal (dangerous) than others.
That danger can and has been and doubtless will also continue also to be exploited and used as a double edged sword as more and more frequency based cancer treatments are developed.
Likewise, as I have predicted in some of my previous papers, safer communication and broadcasting systems will ultimately have to be developed. This work shows also that neither task will be impossible.