Is 5G safe? Verizon Announces 20 More U.S. Cities to Get 5G

If we don't understand the science of things, then let's call it witchcraft.. and witches are evil.. burn the witch!!!
If you think that 30GHz is bad, then I would recommend you to look up on what does the sun emit. Ban the sun!!!!

originally posted by: eitea
If we don't understand the science of things, then let's call it witchcraft.. and witches are evil.. burn the witch!!!

Due process of scientific invention is meant to keep people safe.

[sarc] If we don't know the science of something, just release it anyway, profits cannot wait, worse comes to worst a couple plebeians get cancer. oh well. [/sarc]

originally posted by: cooperton

Exponential decrease over distance from a source is only if there is one source. There are multiple sources here, which would account for it not being exactly an exponential decrease. I'm sure the scientists took that into consideration in their equation. Unless you really think you're just smarter than everything in the universe?

Actually, multiple sources won't make any difference, unless, there are many, and distributed over an area such that the EM density is never below a specific level. That is NOT what happened here.

Also, those "graphs" are not consistent with EM propagation. That ole "inverse square law" Phage mentioned.

Then there is the frequency involved; 5G is said to be 6Ghz - 24Ghz, and the power levels probably won't be more than 10 - 20 watts/transmitter. Towers may be closer than now if the frequency goes much higher than 6Ghz. By-the-way; we all live with 5Ghz all the time, it's in our wifi.

Power output of the phones themselves probably won't change substantially from the current 0.6Watts. There are issues with power density of the battery and the requirements of a more powerful transmitter, and phone size, cooling, etc.

originally posted by: james1947

Also, those "graphs" are not consistent with EM propagation. That ole "inverse square law" Phage mentioned.

It does not exhibit the same graph because there are adjacent towers that cause an additive effect on the W/m2 value, so the graph slope is less than exponential. Phage conceded to this fact on the last page.

Then there is the frequency involved; 5G is said to be 6Ghz - 24Ghz

From what I saw, 5G is going to work from 5GHz-100GHz

and the power levels probably won't be more than 10 - 20 watts/transmitter. Power output of the phones themselves probably won't change substantially from the current 0.6Watts.

Well yeah this is information that the public should be made aware of before 5G is released. But they don't seem to care. I would love more info regarding the power densities that will be exhibited with 5G systems.

i hope that it kills mosquitoes too.

www.activistpost.com... ition-5g-failure-and-future-lawsuits.html

Bold indeed – The FCC is supposed to regulate the Telecom Industry and protect the public even though it seems like they have been doing everything but for 20+ years. (See 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
In regard to 5G:
1. The FCC is being investigated for collusion with the Telecom Industry.
2. Lawsuits have also been filed against the FCC about forced 5G installation (See 1, 2).
3. There was a bill introduced in January that would overturn forced federal 5G installation in local communities.
200+ doctors and scientists have been demanding a moratorium on 5G installation since 2017.

ehtrust.org...

5G will get done because the elite Telecom industry wants it.

Too much money involved

originally posted by: cooperton

From what I saw, 5G is going to work from 5GHz-100GHz

According to official specifications there are two frequency ranges; FR1, and FR2.

FR1 is define3d as the frequency range between as low as 750Mhz and 6GHz

FR2 is defined as frequencies between 24GHz and 100GHz. However AT&T has decided to use the 39GHZ frequency for their 5G, and Verizon and the others will all use compatible frequencies in a similar range.

Here are a couple of links that simplify this a bit:
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

Documents also show that the maximum power output will be on the order of 20 watts.

Now, to those graphs you showed...

Yes Phage conceded, I did not...you see Phage conceded prematurely...

See the grey 'traces', they start at around 20 watts and drop to 5 watts over 100 meters distance. According to inverse square law the power loss there should be down to 2 milliwatts, not 5 watts.

kind of like this: Prcv = Ptrans/d^2

-or-

Prcv = 20/10,000 = 0.002 w/m^2

Where Prcv = EM power at receiver
Ptrans = Transmitted EM power
d = distance in meters

The bit about adjacent towers is kind of weak since it would not be at all practical to place Cell towers at 200 meter intervals. Todays 4G towers are miles apart, in fact where I live there is only one cell tower within 2 miles, our signal strength isn't the best, but adequate.

Using what is within the 5G frequency range; wifi, we can get ranges of several miles (3 - 5) with a rather standard WiFi card for a PC, and a improved antenna (actually a small dish). Your WIFI router probably has a power output of around 1 Watt. So it is reasonable to expect 5G to operate pretty much as 4G does, even with reduced range of the radio-sets. It appears as though there won't much increase in radio/EM power levels.

Well yeah this is information that the public should be made aware of before 5G is released. But they don't seem to care. I would love more info regarding the power densities that will be exhibited with 5G systems.

Yes, but, the right information is always better.

a reply to: Willtell
Not sure were there is a question there?

But ya, the Buddha was right, that's why he didn't much stick around this place, its for nubbs.

And technologists and consumers sure do like there gadgets, its a love circle. Now how many of you are on your cellphones or PCs right now?

A trick question right? As for 5G? Well depends, like anything. I try not to spend more then a few hours on the PC or staring at any screen, mostley because it ruins your eyesight, and that everybody knows now a days.

So things like wifi, or 5g or whatnot. Well I think they maybe should have just stuck with the original wardenclyffe designs and concepts, but then again, some people do like there jobs, and also others there profits. Either way though, you can not introduce something new into a ecosystem without there being both benefits and drawbacks.

Didn't you watch that one vid somebody posted earlier in this thread? The one on a TED talk. I know not many people watch that stuff because its old knowledge and even old news, but then again, with what are we comparing it to? CNN and FOX news? Dont even know how there is a "news" part in those two words.

But case in point, I try not to spend to much staring at a screen, and wifi? Well need to turn that sucker off once in a while. Like the guy in the vid said, if your sensitive to that stuff, well go corded instead of cordless, or get rid of it, get a flip phone if you dont like the 5g, though dont know how many it would effect and to what degree, but if he said people are quitting there jobs because of it, getting skin rashes because of it, and all the noise is effecting them, some to the point of becoming homeless to get away from all the technology and phones.

Well, whos to say, whos making # up or not, right? Either way. But I am quite sure that if it is, you will eventually notice it. Eventually being the word. Much less when there is a mini tower on every corner. So we shall see, or at least those who still have the capability to see, the rest, well they will be informed about it at some point and latter date.

originally posted by: james1947

The bit about adjacent towers is kind of weak since it would not be at all practical to place Cell towers at 200 meter intervals. Todays 4G towers are miles apart

The thing with 5G is that it requires a closer proximity of 5G cell towers. It is because the 5GHz-100GHz band is apparently not able to penetrate most objects. So they need more of them. I don't think there is any stopping the release of 5G. Your enthusiasm for it is representative of most people. I often complain about my slow connection speeds, so I am also on board to a degree.

But the sacrifice is the humanity of individual confrontations, situations, and the reality of being human. I realize this to be the transhumanist dream - to conquer the insuffiencies of humans with artificial interactions. I want to leave the people be that put their faith in this insufficient human interaction. But there will exist a group of people that will transcend the necessities of technology and realize the capabilities of the pure spirit existing within the human body, that will not need the artificial connectivity that so many crave.

originally posted by: cooperton

The thing with 5G is that it requires a closer proximity of 5G cell towers. It is because the 5GHz-100GHz band is apparently not able to penetrate most objects. So they need more of them. I don't think there is any stopping the release of 5G. Your enthusiasm for it is representative of most people. I often complain about my slow connection speeds, so I am also on board to a degree.

Yes, actually I know all about that, and yes, 5G will require that either towers are closer or the power is increased. The thing is that the power output of our phones will determine that, and currently that is only about 0.5 watts...we shouldn't expect that to change, so towers will have to be closer, and more of them; I guess we can expect the towers to go from miles apart to ...well, miles apart!

At the low end of the 5G spectrum is our beloved WiFi; typically operating at 2.5Ghz or 5Ghz, depending on what is connecting. The range from a no more than 1 watt transceiver (like in your PC) can be up to 12 miles, at the upper end of the 5G spectrum, at around 40Ghz, and at the same power levels that range will still be up to half of that.

And that is just the radio technology being used, in reality cell phones can be up to 45 miles from a tower and still work, though no more than 22 miles is preferred. This is because of the critical timing that takes place, and the length of time it takes for a radio signal to travel from the phone to the tower. These "timings" probably won't change much since the speed of light will remain constant.

So in reality, there doesn't really need to be much of a change in the spacing of cell towers since even at 40Ghz the signal should still be strong enough for a decent receiver to work...unfortunately that doesn't mean that our phones will have a decent receiver, or transmitter. Nor does that guarantee any improved engineering of the tower electronics either...

But the sacrifice is the humanity of individual confrontations, situations, and the reality of being human. I realize this to be the transhumanist dream - to conquer the insuffiencies of humans with artificial interactions.

ROFLMAO!!! You sound like my millennial son...most of his "transhuman" rhetoric are the blatherings of a child who has not experienced much as of yet...I know for a damn fact, he will change his view several times over the next 50 years...been there done that (he's 23, I'm 72)

So...I'll see your sacrifice, and raise you improved communication, and knowledge access...both will be supported by your 100+MB connection. The resulting increase in connection speed, and vastly improved access will more than offset your sacrifice.

Did you know that 4GLTE, what we use now, will support up to 54MB? and that is at 800Mhz, just the increase to 5Ghz will more than double that.

Finally; please do not confuse my understanding of this technology for "enthusiasm"... I have no reason to be enthusiastic. It is just the evolution of a technology...simple, logical, practical.

FYI: 5G antenna installers wear anti-radiation suits.

Photo: twitter.com...

Here is a real issue with 5G, although it is only the 24GHz band Link

It seems that some of the weather sensors use 23.6 - 24.0GHz, which is very close to the 5G frequency band. This is very likely to cause interference with weather sensing, and reduce the accuracy, and speed of weather data development.

As I understand it Verizon is wanting to use the 24Ghz band, while AT&T will use the 39GHz band, and it seems that T-mobile/Sprint will go "mid band" at around 6GHz.

This is the same bunch of people that push opiods of increasing strength exponentially , despite the proven detriment to health and well being, and the toxic side effects, all the while pushing to stop things like marijuana and mushrooms, etc, which have been studying in depth

I dont trust them one effing inch to be honest about any of it.