Guest guest Posted August 23, 2012 Report Share Posted August 23, 2012 Sorry, Located a typographic error that might be confusing in my prior posting. Corrected portion below. Bare " Some members of the UK group felt the 10X treatment frequencies might have been correct. Certainly, the one team member did not believe the 10x frequencies were correct, and felt the actual frequencies should have been 1/10th that measured. In other words 802 hz was correct and not the 8020 hz. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.