Live data from Hacker News

A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

spectrum.ieee.org

151–160 of 171 posts

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electrosensitivity is denied by intelligent healthy people who have never dealt with unexplainable fatigue relying on statistics and body system diagnosis that is inadequate for explaining chronic complex health conditions. They're all just whinging man. Not one of them ever hoped it was all in their head and they could think their way out of it. Hacker News is a perfect subset of people lacking the perspective to co…

> Why so much negativity about researching something so ubiquitous? There's nothing wrong with researching electrosensitivity to see if it's real, and to what extent. Heck, I've designed studies to test it (never carried out). The problem is not researching it, yet continuing to insist that it is the reason for people's "unexplainable" chronic pain / fatigue when there's currently zero non-anecdotal evidence for it.

I communicated poorly I accept that but I never insisted it was the reason for unexplainable chronic pain/fatigue. ER amplifies explainable fatigue in some situations hence complaints from three percent of the population. My pure guess is that there's zero non-anecdotal evidence because it is difficult to study a subset of people dismissed as hypochondriacs and it is definitely not profitable.

I'm going to look at the research and I really hope I have to eat my words so I can relax more around my Iphone and laptop but I know from personal hard fought experience while extremely fatigued that minimising ER exposure was helpful. I'm glad to hear there's a gap in the literature and it will be fun figuring out why or that I'm completely wrong on this. Chronically fatigued people do not have the energy spare to even contemplate critiquing er exposure research and only Five percent make a recovery. It's a gauntlet and I ran it with the research I could absorb while fatigued, pre diagnosis dietary knowledge, intuition and curiosity.

The ubiquitous comment was meant in relation to the ER emissions of Iphones which is trivial to study directly rather than relying on models making predictions from what is tested 5 mm out. Test at 1mm 2mm 3mm ... there's no need to model er emission of something as high volume as an Iphone. The research can be done directly for research's sake independently of any health concerns. Sorry about that confusion.

Surely one electrical engineering school somewhere in the world can make a rig so that we aren't relying on controversial math to accurately determine the magnitude and type of radiation emitted from electrical devices. A series of concentric boxes or globes with sensors going three meters out at sensible intervals would eliminate the need for any modelling and a personal emf sensor industry which seems a rort.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#152

Are they talking about the radiation from the Wi-Fi or cell radios? I would think that modern phones have very low duty cycles on those radios. The other radiation, e.g. from the clocking of the circuits should be extremely low, otherwise our batteries wouldn't last so long.

Cell radios. The wifi is much lower wattage than cellular so its effects will be marginal.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#154
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electrosensitivity is not a thing. It's a disorder made up by hypochondriacs. If you said 3 percent of the population are hypochondriacs then I would believe you.

It's interesting how certain you are. What you mean to say is "we've never seen scientific evidence that Electrosensitivity is real, therefore as we currently understand it can't be". Much like the Earth going around the sun, bacon causing cancer, BPA in plastic being bad (and now the substitutes too) etc. etc. It's always not true until we discover it is.

Don’t forget these peoples ‘senses’ are easily disproved by blind tests. It’s much more of a hoax than you imply.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#155
I have posted this in the previous post that came up about this but I am quite concerned that the idustry may be currently self certifing its devices and getting phones past FCC regulations that do not meet the requirements just like Boeing and the FAA. We need proper funding for the FCC so they can do that job and not some industry paid company with a conflict of intrest.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may need to check your math. Inverse square does not fall off faster than exponential.

1/x² has a singularity and rises faster than exponential as you approach it. We're talking about getting closer to the source, not further.

It should be obvious that real world antenna don’t behave this way as they are not point sources. But, mathematically you’re correct.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#157
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1/x² has a singularity and rises faster than exponential as you approach it. We're talking about getting closer to the source, not further.

It should be obvious that real world antenna don’t behave this way as they are not point sources. But, mathematically you’re correct.

As you get closer and closer to the surface of the phone, phenomena progress from a visible glow, to pair production, to the thermodynamic stability of quark-gluon plasma.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#158
post #153

If the phone has a strong wifi signal but a very poor cell signal, will it emit a lot of RF still?

Yes, the wattage required to reach the cell tower is unaffected by wifi coverage.

If there is WiFi, the radios will be much much less active or even switch away from LTE/5G.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#159
post #141
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't know yet, so.. better safe than sorry, no?

Imagine if we said this about the food that comes out of every new restaurant. Risk management is more than just universal risk aversion.

Yes, at least in my country, every restaurant is subject to stringent hygiene regulations and audits. Is it a problem for you?

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#160
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of these smartphones go through imperical tests in an anechoic chamber managed by a third party lab to see if they’re bellow the allowed levels in each band. That sounds hackish but (IMO) isn’t the end of the world. What weirds me out is that they’ll send them to these third party labs and repeatedly test some small number (possibly one) of devices until it’s right up against what’s allowed. That feels less tha…

The "conspiracy" portion of my brain makes me wonder if it's possible that Apple phones have lower power levels if the location services determines that the phone is in a location with a known anechoic chamber. There can't be that many of them. Such behavior has already been shown by automobile manufacturers during the "diesel-gate" incidents.

You don’t have to do that, usually you’ll run special test firmware on the device and say that this behaves appropriately (I’ve done this for other companies)

Remember that this is fundamentally a legal/social thing that involves engineering/science and not the other way around.

Post reply on HN