I scan 116,000-152,000, why 7 out of the 20 came up between 104,060-104,800and all are blank on the reverse lookup (except 2)?

Few things to clarify as it affects my answer.

First you mention the scan from 116,000 - 152,000. Was this a typo, as unless you had a custom scan, this is not one of the ranges of the included biofeedback scans.

Reason I ask is also your reported hits of 104,060 - 104,800 do not fit within this range.

How this affects my answer is as follows:

If you scan from 76k to 152k (octal range) you will get the top 20 from the entire pool. This returns hits that are truly your top 20. You will find the spread to be much different than if you scan this same range in 4 quarter scans.

Finding the top say 5 hits in each quarter section guarantees that the spread will contain 5 hits in each quarter, ensuring that the top hits are spread out.

So depending on the range you scanned, while you got a grouping in a particular area, may not be as indicative of a top issue. They are still hits and will do good work, just may not have the same weight as you may perceive at first glance.

I also understand that to perform a full scan can be very time consuming; hence, why there are shorter scans. The results while not weighted the same, still do good work and thus the compromise is acceptable.

Now, as to not getting a hit in reverse lookup, this is normal. Remember that what the body returns as a hit, is a hit for whatever it is. There is no exact science to be able to put a name on the hits.

The reverse lookup is only a method to try and see what other frequency programs have frequencies that are close to the hit. If it does not exist in the database, it can't be matched up. Even if it matches up, does not guarantee that the named frequency program is the source of why you got the hit.

A spread over 104,060 - 104,800 is actually quite dispersed and may not have any relation to each other.

The frequency 104,060 has a MOR tolerance spread of +- 26.015 Hz. If your next hit was 104,080 then it may be for the same response, but 104,100 would not be within range to elicit a response from the same source. I'm taking a bit of liberty here that you scanned using the step size of 20 that is default for this range.

For more details, please check the link:

Was this article helpful?
0 out of 0 found this helpful



Please sign in to leave a comment.

Articles in this section

See more
Our Blog
Get the latest news and updates first
Our helpline hours:
9 AM – 6PM UTC+8, Monday – Friday
Video Guides
Learn how to use Spooky2 with our short, step-by-step video guides