Re: Vibrational excitations DNA

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 7:07 PM

[snip]

> In any event, as it

> would be difficult to ascribe directional influences to popular Rife

> modalities, I believe the implied significance for us is more in

> terms of overall cellular stress response. This is alluded to in the

> links below. It does not presume a resonant mode, and can involve the

> far lower audio frequencies we are accustomed to.

_____________________________________________________________

, could you explain what you mean by " directional influences " ?

Rife plasma devices put out to a greater or lesser degree, an e-field - some of

them a very strong e-field - and that field would have to possess direction.

DNA is known to be very reactive to e-fields, and will orient itself parallel to

the direction of the field. Because DNA carries an extremely dense negative

charge along its backbone, the orientation process also involves flux of the

surrounding layer of positive ions. These ions are tightly electrostatically

bound under normal physiological conditions (not bound as in chemical bonds).

Motion of the surrounding ion layer in response to an e-field is part of what

causes parallel DNA alignment to that field.

This site describes current research using DNA e-field orientation,

http://www.microscopy.olympus.eu/microscopes/About_Microscopy_8982.htm

Their conclusions paragraph describes another possible contribution to the

alignment process:

" When exposed to an electric field, a dipole is induced along the DNA, and the

resulting electrokinetic torque that acts on these induced dipoles aligns the

DNA locally with the electric field. However, the local alignment can be

parallel or anti-parallel. "

There is also a book called " Bioelectrochemistry of Biomacromolecules " by Lenaz

and Milazzo (1996), and the first chapter deals with nucleic acids (DNA). Some

of the text is available at google books. " Electric field effects on DNA " are

described beginning on page 69 (section 4.1.4). On page 72 at section 4.1.4.3

is a description of how electric fields, especially at certain strengths, can

cause conformational changes and actual unzipping of DNA in solution. And at

page 84, section 4.1.7.3, research surrounding chain-length related resonant

absorption in the low microwave (low gigahertz) region is discussed, along with

the role of the electric field and the decoupling of ion motion from the

surrounding solvent environment. This is a phonon (longitudinal,

mechanical/acoustic) type of response, not electromagnetic. It would probably

qualify as an electroacoustic phenomenon, something Jim Bare has brought up a

number of times. When this happens, an electromagnetic emission under certain

conditions will couple with the object and/or its immediate surrounding

environment, and due to the object's electrical characteristics will cause a

mechanical (acoustic) phonon response.

The webpage for this book will not allow copying of the url or any of the text,

but if you google the title of the book, it will be the first item on the list.

There are many many other journal articles in the literature about electric

field effects on DNA, and the mechanical-acoustic resonant response in the low

microwave region. Some of those papers are cited at my website, and relate the

response to the speed of sound through DNA. This is another scenario where an

EM type of wave could couple to an object and cause a mechanical/acoustic

vibrational response.

Another paper from 1984 says, " application of electric field pulses to

biological macromolecules requires special caution, since the field pulses may

induce conformational changes...Some of these conformation changes may be

induced already at moderate field strength. In most of the cases investigated

the reaction is driven by the dissociation of ion complexes accompanied by a

polarisation of the ion atmosphere around the ploymer molecules. The ion

displacement may result in the dissociation of ordered structures... " (from

Interactions of Nucleic Acid Double Helices Induced by Electric Field Pulses, by

Porschke D et al, Biophysical Chemistry 20 [1984], 225-235). This is a very

similar process to what is described in the aforementioned book.

It appears there is a distinct possibility that currently-used plasma devices,

which not only emit e-field but also contain measurable harmonics reaching into

the upper megahertz and low gigahertz region, may be creating the necessary

conditions for disruption of susceptible lengths of DNA. I use the word

susceptible, because human DNA is more electrically shielded than pathogen DNA,

and human DNA is also much longer and more complex in its twisting and folding

patterns.

It is my sense that the potential success of the DNA-related frequency method

taps into these modes of activity, including but not necessarily limited to

characteristics of plasma emission, presence of high and complex interacting

harmonics, and inducing resonant phonon mode(s) of response not contained in the

audio or infrared regions. Additionally, the fact that the DNA molecule itself

is considered a flexible crystalline-like substance, presents the possibility of

piezoelectric response. It is likely that a number of these phenomena are

working together in a complex but cooperative, coherent manner. From the

foregoing information, it gradually becomes clearer that not all frequency

emission modalities currently on the market may generate the necessary

conditions for the DNA-related frequency response to work. More research into

specific details is needed.

Char

www.dnafrequencies.com

[Guest guest]

>[snip]

> > In any event, as it

> > would be difficult to ascribe directional influences to popular Rife

> > modalities, I believe the implied significance for us is more in

> > terms of overall cellular stress response. This is alluded to in the

> > links below. It does not presume a resonant mode, and can involve the

> > far lower audio frequencies we are accustomed to.

>__________________________________________________________

>

>, could you explain what you mean by " directional influences " ?

Essentially Char what you summarized in the second-to-last sentence

of your post, as quoted below. There is no conscious intent to apply

the requisite directional influence. This begs the question, what

specificaly are your criteria for a machine that does generate the

necessary condtions?

" From the foregoing information, it gradually becomes clearer that

not all frequency emission modalities currently on the market may

generate the necessary conditions for the DNA-related frequency

response to work. "

With regard to the effects of e-field orientation itself, you appear

to be citing examples of DNA research conducted in vitro. This is

helpful, as far as it goes. However, field gradients within a living

subject are not similary uniform. The following paper provides some

insight on this in practical terms.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1299558 & blobtype=pdf

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/112130007/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1 & \

SRETRY=0

Additionally, the type of responses you describe also vary with

encountered field strength.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/qxp50u0563546xx0/

Your reference to longitudinal waves illustrates the possibility of

audio spectrum effects based upon eigenfrequencies. Whether or not

these bear a functional, as opposed to mathematical, relationship to

DNA resonance in the IR region is another matter. Positive

therapeutic outcomes from same may be purely coincidental, eg. occur

across a broad range of audio frequencies. In this regard, an

assumption that perhaps warrants further scruntiny is the

specialization of any single numerical frequency. It just seems all a

bit to tidy in view of the highly complex modes of response involved.

After all, Crane used the same handful of frequencies for nearly

everything. I would be looking for the simplest explanation first.

Thinking in terms of " resonance " at 1Hz increments may be unduly

limiting our scope of inquiry.

Nielsen

[Guest guest]

>[snip]

> > In any event, as it

> > would be difficult to ascribe directional influences to popular Rife

> > modalities, I believe the implied significance for us is more in

> > terms of overall cellular stress response. This is alluded to in the

> > links below. It does not presume a resonant mode, and can involve the

> > far lower audio frequencies we are accustomed to.

>__________________________________________________________

>

>, could you explain what you mean by " directional influences " ?

Essentially Char what you summarized in the second-to-last sentence

of your post, as quoted below. There is no conscious intent to apply

the requisite directional influence. This begs the question, what

specificaly are your criteria for a machine that does generate the

necessary condtions?

" From the foregoing information, it gradually becomes clearer that

not all frequency emission modalities currently on the market may

generate the necessary conditions for the DNA-related frequency

response to work. "

With regard to the effects of e-field orientation itself, you appear

to be citing examples of DNA research conducted in vitro. This is

helpful, as far as it goes. However, field gradients within a living

subject are not similary uniform. The following paper provides some

insight on this in practical terms.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1299558 & blobtype=pdf

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/112130007/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1 & \

SRETRY=0

Additionally, the type of responses you describe also vary with

encountered field strength.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/qxp50u0563546xx0/

Your reference to longitudinal waves illustrates the possibility of

audio spectrum effects based upon eigenfrequencies. Whether or not

these bear a functional, as opposed to mathematical, relationship to

DNA resonance in the IR region is another matter. Positive

therapeutic outcomes from same may be purely coincidental, eg. occur

across a broad range of audio frequencies. In this regard, an

assumption that perhaps warrants further scruntiny is the

specialization of any single numerical frequency. It just seems all a

bit to tidy in view of the highly complex modes of response involved.

After all, Crane used the same handful of frequencies for nearly

everything. I would be looking for the simplest explanation first.

Thinking in terms of " resonance " at 1Hz increments may be unduly

limiting our scope of inquiry.

Nielsen