Spark Systems versus PEMF Systems

We consider the Curatron to be a full PEMF system in that it genuinely generates magnetic pulses rather than RF pulses, The PMT120 and others generate probably what can be called an RF pulse similar to those generated by Marconi, Tesla and others demonstrating early forms of radio communication. Marconi used a spark gap that would fire when the voltage across it was high enough to discharge across a preset air gap in the way that lightning occurs when a cloud’s voltage is so high that it has to discharge by creating a spark between the cloud and the ground.

Recall the famous drinking bird who recharges with water to cool himself down
Recall the famous drinking bird who recharges with water to cool himself down

Think of a spark gap and a capacitor in the same way that you would think of water flowing into a tipping bucket that tips and empties itself when the water level reaches a point when gravity takes over causing the bucket to tip. In the case of Marconi and others, they used a tuned circuit so the energy dispensed when their spark gap fired would generate a single frequency and its harmonics into an antenna. The spark systems are similar but there is no tuned circuit and the antenna is the coil or length of wire attached.

A true PEMF system creates a magnetic field caused by a high current in a coil like an electromagnet. PEMF systems are highly controllable. Spark systems generate a series of pulses. The pulse magnitude is dependent on the size of the capacitor (bucket) and the pulse frequency (time between pulses) is dependent on the firing point of the spark gap, basically a semi-controllable bolt of lighting. Maximum voltages in the Curatron system are very low, perhaps 100 Volts or so in comparison to tens of thousands of volts in a spark system where the voltages can reach 30 to 40 kV It’s the high current passing through coil(s) that generate magnetic energy.

It’s a shame that the spark systems use the PEMF name. They really should be called something else to differentiate them from PEMF machines. I remember when MRI machine technology was called NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance). the word nuclear, scared everyone and the name became MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) was born. Of course the word nuclear was used as it is the nucleus of the atoms in our bodies that was referenced, not nuclear energy.

4 thoughts on “Spark Systems versus PEMF Systems”

  1. Hello, Chris,
    Does this mean the PEMF 120 is not effective on treatment? I have a question that really need your help:
    Is it possible or correct to measure the PEMF treatment result by measure the Phase Angle value changes that used in BIO impedance Analysis? Most of the PEMF machines indicate the PEMF treatment can increase permeability of cell membrane or increase the cell voltage, this kind of change shall be reflected in the Phase Angle value. https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/SSS/SSS11/paper/viewFile/2416/2899

  2. I am sorry but any discussion involving Cancer and Cancer treatment is well outside our area of expertise. I am afraid, I cannot comment on your question. See CONTRAINDICATIONS

  3. Hei, Chris,
    The point is not for discussing treating cancer here.
    In general, Can Phase angle be used as a parameter to measure the improvement and indicate the celular voltage increase. since PEMF treatment can increase permeability of cell membrane. If so, how fast we can see the Phase angle change after the PEMF treatment.

Comments are closed.