Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

5g.systemsapproach.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 113 posts

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#61

Post by mrtnmcc »

missosoup wrote: post #58
Nokinside wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We know how the wavelengths penetrate into the body and how much power goes into the skin. In new 60 Ghz 5G wavelengths skin reflects 20-30% of the power and the rest is almost completely absorbed by the epidermis. Overall the power densities are so slow that there is no reason to except anything. Exposing skin to the sun is known radiation hazard. If you go outside during daytime why worry about 5G?

> skin reflects 20-30% of the power and the rest is almost completely absorbed by the epidermis. So 70% of the energy is absorbed by the skin. What does that much energy at those freqs do to the epidermis? I don't know, you don't know. I'm not saying you're making a case for the conspiracy theories, but you're certainly not making one against them. > If you go outside during daytime why worry about 5G? If you go outs…

Molecules don't resonate at 5G frequencies.. even with 5G mmWave, the wavelengths are about 10,000x too long (millimeters). It's like riding on a cruise ship in the ocean and worrying that the wine glass in your hand is going to resonate and shatter from the ocean waves.

The impact on tissue is still thermal.. and the power flux densities of 5G are small compared to the sun, especially so because RF bandwidths are tiny compared to the blackbody radiation spectrum of the sun.

You would have to show why these RF transmissions are more pathological than the random process EM waves generated by solar blackbody. If you look at a modern cellular OFDM waveform, it is almost statistically indistinguishable from broadband noise. It had the same Peak to average power ratio, the same flat spectral bandwidths, and the same affinity to causing resonances--its just much much lower in amplitude than solar.

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#62

Post by missosoup »

mrtnmcc wrote: post #61
missosoup wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> skin reflects 20-30% of the power and the rest is almost completely absorbed by the epidermis. So 70% of the energy is absorbed by the skin. What does that much energy at those freqs do to the epidermis? I don't know, you don't know. I'm not saying you're making a case for the conspiracy theories, but you're certainly not making one against them. > If you go outside during daytime why worry about 5G? If you go outs…

Molecules don't resonate at 5G frequencies.. even with 5G mmWave, the wavelengths are about 10,000x too long (millimeters). It's like riding on a cruise ship in the ocean and worrying that the wine glass in your hand is going to resonate and shatter from the ocean waves. The impact on tissue is still thermal.. and the power flux densities of 5G are small compared to the sun, especially so because RF bandwidths are ti…

All polar molecules will react to all EM fields. (did you know you can bend a water stream with a magnet?).

The wavelength of microwave ovens is even longer, at 6.66cm. And yet that's the rotational resonant frequency of water. Weird, huh? By the way, you can confirm this with a single slice of cheese with the turnplate removed and then calculate the speed of light from the burn marks on that cheese being 3.33cm apart :)

The only question is whether that reaction at any given frequency has any impact on the larger system those molecules are part of.

The answer is scientists aren't sure because they haven't had a chance to experiment much, and you and I are sure as shit not qualified to comment on it.

I'm not going to don a tinfoil hat over 5g rollouts, but this cavalier attitude of just expecting everything to be fine without any meaningful testing is just as bad if not worse than the conspiracy theories.

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#63

Post by ilogik »

brookhaven_dude wrote: post #60
s_dev wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a tin foil hat thing. It's just wireless frequencies -- which may have some minor impact but it wouldn't be any different to 4G or 3G really and you can see that tech came and hasn't caused any major health issues.

Lack of evidence is not evidence of falsehood. Strong magnetic fields can make you forget things. No one know what sort of effect wrought by weak EM radiation exposure over decades. Some of us would like to err on the side of caution, if feasible. Just like GMO and organic food.

"strong magnetic fields can make you forget things"

source?

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#64

Post by [deleted] »

mrtnmcc wrote: post #61
missosoup wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> skin reflects 20-30% of the power and the rest is almost completely absorbed by the epidermis. So 70% of the energy is absorbed by the skin. What does that much energy at those freqs do to the epidermis? I don't know, you don't know. I'm not saying you're making a case for the conspiracy theories, but you're certainly not making one against them. > If you go outside during daytime why worry about 5G? If you go outs…

Molecules don't resonate at 5G frequencies.. even with 5G mmWave, the wavelengths are about 10,000x too long (millimeters). It's like riding on a cruise ship in the ocean and worrying that the wine glass in your hand is going to resonate and shatter from the ocean waves. The impact on tissue is still thermal.. and the power flux densities of 5G are small compared to the sun, especially so because RF bandwidths are ti…

[deleted]

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#65

Post by tboyd47 »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #49
tboyd47 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the use-case for this range is when there is NO obstacles to go through (it does not really work otherwise...) So, on the one hand, 5G is going to make unicorns fly down and carry us to the heavens on wings of pure data, and on the other hand, it can't go through walls...? Research shows that two thirds of consumers are not willing to pay even $1 more for 5G internet. [0] Regardless of the promises companies are ma…

Most data are consumed indoor anyway, so mmwave will likely be used through indoor micro cells. mmwave also allows to boost capacity. As already written in my previous comment, 5G is not just about faster internet. Other use-cases are as important, if not more. Operators know they can't charge consumers extra.

Right, so far we've learned:

1) 5G improves wireless internet - though it only works over short-range and can't go through walls.

2) 5G needs a massive deployment of new devices to reach consumers - though most consumers are not willing to pay even $1 more for 5G.

3) 5G is a prerequisite for amazing new tech like IoT and self-driving cars - many of which already exist and will continue to use existing 3G and 4G bands.

"Dubious" is actually me being generous!

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#66

Post by mrtnmcc »

missosoup wrote: post #62
mrtnmcc wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Molecules don't resonate at 5G frequencies.. even with 5G mmWave, the wavelengths are about 10,000x too long (millimeters). It's like riding on a cruise ship in the ocean and worrying that the wine glass in your hand is going to resonate and shatter from the ocean waves. The impact on tissue is still thermal.. and the power flux densities of 5G are small compared to the sun, especially so because RF bandwidths are ti…

All polar molecules will react to all EM fields. (did you know you can bend a water stream with a magnet?). The wavelength of microwave ovens is even longer, at 6.66cm. And yet that's the rotational resonant frequency of water. Weird, huh? By the way, you can confirm this with a single slice of cheese with the turnplate removed and then calculate the speed of light from the burn marks on that cheese being 3.33cm apar…

Microwave ovens are not very narrowband and certainly do not excite 'rotational resonances of water'. The periodic burn marks on your cheese are from coarse standing waves within the microwave oven cavity (related to the magnetron resonance and spacing of the walls).. it has nothing to do with molecular resonances.

EDIT: the reason it cooks food is the intensity of the field strength (1 kilowatt per cubic ft, or ~27,000 watts per cubic meter) in a microwave oven. 5G signals are tens of microwatts (millionths of a watt) per cubic meter. That's a difference of a factor of 10's of billions.

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#67

Post by JoeDaDude »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #45
tboyd47 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theoretically, 5G will use a higher frequency band of radiation (24Ghz-86Ghz). This band has a harder time penetrating obstacles, so you will need many more transmitters at a higher power level to cover an area. Opponents are uncomfortable with the enthusiasm of the telecom companies over 5G without sufficient (they feel) long-term research on the health effects of saturating entire neighborhoods with millimeter-wave…

The mmwave range is only one of the 5G ranges. 5G will also use the same ranges as 3G and 4G. In the mmwave range transmitters will not have to transmit higher power levels. First because the use-case for this range is when there is NO obstacles to go through (it does not really work otherwise...), in short distance situations, and then also because beam forming will always be used. > especially when the benefits of…

The short range and poor transmission of the higher frequencies leads me to speculate that the intended use case is micro cells that replace wifi. There will be a micro cell in every conference room and hotel lobby.

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#68

Post by missosoup »

mrtnmcc wrote: post #66
missosoup wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All polar molecules will react to all EM fields. (did you know you can bend a water stream with a magnet?). The wavelength of microwave ovens is even longer, at 6.66cm. And yet that's the rotational resonant frequency of water. Weird, huh? By the way, you can confirm this with a single slice of cheese with the turnplate removed and then calculate the speed of light from the burn marks on that cheese being 3.33cm apar…

Microwave ovens are not very narrowband and certainly do not excite 'rotational resonances of water'. The periodic burn marks on your cheese are from coarse standing waves within the microwave oven cavity (related to the magnetron resonance and spacing of the walls).. it has nothing to do with molecular resonances. EDIT: the reason it cooks food is the intensity of the field strength (1 kilowatt per cubic ft, or ~27,…

Please explain the mechanism for the 2.45Mhz microwave oven cooking food and how that rules out the possibility of the 5g band having unintended interactions with molecules found in living organisms. You can settle this debate for the EU and save them a few million bucks worth of studies.

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#69

Post by mercutio2 »

missosoup wrote: post #58
Nokinside wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We know how the wavelengths penetrate into the body and how much power goes into the skin. In new 60 Ghz 5G wavelengths skin reflects 20-30% of the power and the rest is almost completely absorbed by the epidermis. Overall the power densities are so slow that there is no reason to except anything. Exposing skin to the sun is known radiation hazard. If you go outside during daytime why worry about 5G?

> skin reflects 20-30% of the power and the rest is almost completely absorbed by the epidermis. So 70% of the energy is absorbed by the skin. What does that much energy at those freqs do to the epidermis? I don't know, you don't know. I'm not saying you're making a case for the conspiracy theories, but you're certainly not making one against them. > If you go outside during daytime why worry about 5G? If you go outs…

All EM waves can interact with molecules in our bodies, that’s true.

But all of the interaction is thermal, not ionizing. And the energy levels are so tiny that the thermal impact is much less than the thermal impact of opening or closing a window on a warm day.

Microwave ovens have thermal interactions with the food inside them, because the microwave runs at tens of thousands of times higher power than is used for radio frequency signaling.

2.4 GHz WiFi isn’t microwaving our bodies, and neither will 5G.

Re: 5G Mobile Networks: A Systems Approach

#70

Post by henrikeh »

dmos62 wrote: post #6
wallflower wrote: post #3

I heard the real reason we need 5G is to sell more new phones. Thinner and bigger and better cameras isn’t enough anymore. However, mobile phones running 5G radios will deplete their battery far more rapidly than LTE, right? And that is assuming the 5G phone user is in a major metropolitan area where there is sufficient coverage to begin with.

You bring up some valid points. I traveled to China recently. Phones like iPhone 5 practically don't work there, because the specifications supported by these phones are phased out to such a degree that you're hard pressed to find coverage even in urban areas. I.e. 4G and 5G made the older specs obsolete, so you're obligated to buy a newer device. Though, I guess it's possible that these bands were never supported in…

The Chinese telcos developed their own 3G standard called TD-CDMA.

Note that 3G refers to a family or classification of network technologies, and the same is true for the other G’s. As an example CDMA2000 and UMTS are both competing 3G standards.

Post reply on HN