Live data from Hacker News

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

spectrum.ieee.org

141–150 of 171 posts

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

#141
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This ignores the primary issue of needing empirical evidence before claiming discovery. If non-ionizing radiation of a certain level is hazardous then it is provable. Affecting enzyme reactions is an observed effect, but what is the health risk?

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.

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

#142
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This ignores the primary issue of needing empirical evidence before claiming discovery. If non-ionizing radiation of a certain level is hazardous then it is provable. Affecting enzyme reactions is an observed effect, but what is the health risk?

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

Don’t we? Plenty of people are exposed to power desnities of non-ionizing radiation that far exceed this FCC limit for decades. If there was a serious concern then would it have not already become clear?

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

#144
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Turn your wifi off in your house at night and see if you sleep any better. This needs to be a blind test, e.g. you track your sleep quality over a longer period of time while a script turns wifi off on random nights.

When I was mining bitcoin I discovered graphics cards under load mess with my sleep, I would wake up feeling like I was very sick if I slept in the same room as a rig.

Noise, heat or blinking LEDs should be your first suspicions. Maybe transformer whine, with low quality power supplies. EM noise should be very low down your list of plausible causes.

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

#145
post #110
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, division just isn't a total function.

I think these may be the same thing in this case.

I'm following along in this thread here and double checking everybody's math.

So... does this mean I will die from radiation or not?

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

#146
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think these may be the same thing in this case.

I'm following along in this thread here and double checking everybody's math. So... does this mean I will die from radiation or not?

This thread is actually irrelevant to the radiation question due to the plane radiator thing mentioned above.

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

#147
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Turn your wifi off in your house at night and see if you sleep any better. This needs to be a blind test, e.g. you track your sleep quality over a longer period of time while a script turns wifi off on random nights.

You could just try it. Turn off the electrical stuff before you go to bed but hey everyone has freedom of choice.

Sure, but you won’t learn much except how susceptible you are to the placebo effect.

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

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you cover the green leds with tape mask, or get version with an accurate fake blinking patterns.

My ISP supplied router has an option to turn the lights off, which is great as otherwise it illuminates the whole hallway. I don't get why electronics makers think their product needs to have such bright lights.

I've had a tiny chargeable buzzer that would light up entire rooms when it was plugged in. I started habitually closing the bathroom door just so it didn't bother me when trying to sleep.

I eventually got fed up that I broke the LED with some fingernail clippers. The device never turned on again.

I'm a pretty easy going person in life but learned how mad I could get over time at a pointlessly bright light and the people who put it there.

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

#150
post #4

Testing phones from 5 millimeters away from the body may seem close, but for anyone carrying their phone in a pocket, the distance is closer to 2 millimeters. Because wireless power falls off exponentially with distance, what might be a safe amount of RF exposure at 5 millimeters could be much higher at 2 millimeters. They mean to say that you should expect a power about 6 times higher, (5^2 / 2^2). This is rubbish.…

FWIW when you're closer to an antenna than the wavelength, you're not just seeing normal Gauss's law drop off, you can be looking an an evanescent wave [1], which does indeed fall off exponentially (well, depends on the exact shape of the antenna). I've designed a short-range 'antenna' that is intentionally not impedance matched to the vacuum, and radiates very poorly - but the RF intensity close to the antenna is ve…

Cool. Could this be used for wireless charging and/or less snoopable RFID/contactless replacement?
Post reply on HN