Technology Forum

Technology Forum

  1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52982
    10 Aug '20 18:15
    So the post closed and I am now answering it.
    Filthy mouth or no, it doesn't change the fact that piece is a worthless piece of [introduce your own filthy word]
    The thing about 5G as I mentioned in the other post of 5G part deux is there is a lot of research on the effects of radiation on the body and X rays, infrared, visible light, UV AND gigahertz radio waves are all the same stuff, electromagnetic waves but different size wavelengths, like light might have a wavelength of 1/25,000th of an inch long but a 300 MEGAhertz signal has a wavelength of one METER, sorry about the two kinds of units.
    The issue there is this: does such radiation have direct effects on say DNA in life forms and X rays and such DO have such effects, even UVC light has a short enough wavelength to damage DNA and so scramble our very life codes.

    The thing about longer wavelengths say 3000 Megahertz, or 3 Gigahertz is those wavelengths can HEAT up cells and if powerful enough can internally boil cells which is why we use such wavelengths in our microwave ovens.

    Those things have been around for almost 70 years now and no huge upwelling of cancer cases due to being near a running microwave oven has been found.
    There have been cases where a microwave oven has been found to not seal off the high energy RF inside and leaking out significant amounts where one person noted it felt nice to have her guts heated up like that but even there she did not get permanent damage to her insides from not knowing exactly what was going on.
    But the power of the leakage was some fraction of the thousand watts of RF a good microwave oven puts out, say 90% gets to the food and 10% was leaked out, that means she was hit with about 100 watts of RF, a significant energy level for sure.

    However, a 5 G sat is hundreds or thousands of miles up and the amount of actual energy deposited is very low and BTW they won't be using 60 gigahertz just yet, instead, 10 or 15 gigahertz to start with. But that energy is not capable of actual ionizing of cells so the worry is unfounded. Only if we get so frigging smart with RF we can send down megawatts of UV with huge amounts of information stuffed into such signals would there be any worry about real damage done by such RF. Anything else, 60 giga hertz or 6 HUNDRED gigahertz would have the same effect, HEATING ONLY and at the levels we would get on the ground that would be in the MILLIWATT level or most likely MICROWATT levels and we are already getting that in our cell phones so if you are worried about 5G then don't use your cell phones, put the tin foil around THOSE devices not your head.
    I have worked with RF up to 40 gigahertz for decades and besides my professional work with RF I am a ham, amateur radio operator and we use walkie talkies at the 5 and even 10 watt levels and there are many research projects studying the effects of such radiation and the jury is still basically out after 40 years of such study, and such RF for one thing is impossible to cause cancer for instance.
    It might bring on heating problems if you have 10 watts next you your head for days on end but that is not how we use them, a few seconds of talk and the rest listening so it would take DECADES of such radiation to make noticeable effects on human cells.
  2. Joined
    07 Mar '14
    Moves
    30400
    10 Sep '20 19:31
    @sonhouse
    Nice comment.
    I read that 5G at 60 gigs blocks oxygen absorption by the iron molecules in red blood cells.
    I also read that a vanadium alloy covfefe in the antenna has the property of making 5G at 60 gigs safe.
    Apparently, this may be why Huawei was banned.
  3. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52982
    12 Sep '20 15:191 edit
    @Bob-Kramer
    You have any link to that oxygen thing? For a study like that they would have to show levels of intensity of the 60 Gigahertz waves. If it was a microwatt, chances are pretty solid nothing would happen. At one watt, maybe a difference.
    The question is, are cell phones going to get 60 gig transmitters and receivers? That is a very high frequency for electronics to achieve.
    On the plus side, you get more bandwidth the higher in frequency you go. So maybe eventually it will get to Terahertz frequencies, which is basically long wave Infra red light. Right now it is difficult to get any kind of power out with those devises.
  4. Joined
    07 Mar '14
    Moves
    30400
    15 Sep '20 22:35
    @sonhouse
    googled 60 gig 5G:
    https://ourgreaterdestiny.org/2020/02/5g-60-ghz-oxygen-absorption-you-and-coronavirus/

    googled vanadium alloy makes 5G safe:
    https://conspiracydailyupdate.com/2020/07/13/5g-has-been-made-safe-it-will-now-feed-432hz-healing-energy-to-our-cells/

    I'm not a scientist. The statement of the hazard of 5G and the statement of the solution is enough understanding for me.
  5. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48729
    15 Sep '20 22:451 edit
    @bob-kramer said
    @sonhouse

    https://conspiracydailyupdate.com/2020/07/13/5g-has-been-made-safe-it-will-now-feed-432hz-healing-energy-to-our-cells/

    I'm not a scientist.
    You think conspiracydailyupdate.com is the best place to go for info?

    And "covfefe in the antenna" ... you are joking? Please!
  6. SubscriberKewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    Australia
    Joined
    20 Jan '09
    Moves
    342112
    16 Sep '20 05:46
    @wolfgang59 said
    You think conspiracydailyupdate.com is the best place to go for info?

    And "covfefe in the antenna" ... you are joking? Please!
    Of course he is. He's pulling your leg so hard you'll be lopsided. ☺
  7. Joined
    07 Mar '14
    Moves
    30400
    17 Sep '20 14:06
    @wolfgang59 said
    You think conspiracydailyupdate.com is the best place to go for info?

    And "covfefe in the antenna" ... you are joking? Please!
    No I did not say it was the best place to go for info.
    I was asked to provide more information.
    I indicated the google terms I used, and it was top of the list.
    Before you slam, you should investigate the topic and tell us what you think.
    How about it?
  8. SubscriberKewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    Australia
    Joined
    20 Jan '09
    Moves
    342112
    17 Sep '20 17:48
    I checked out that site. It's a nutter's paradise. It's like a mass hallucination.
  9. Joined
    07 Mar '14
    Moves
    30400
    17 Sep '20 19:02
    @kewpie said
    I checked out that site. It's a nutter's paradise. It's like a mass hallucination.
    So you looked at the site, and I wasn't recommending the site.
    Did you also look into safe 5G, or were you only interested in another slam?
  10. SubscriberKewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    Australia
    Joined
    20 Jan '09
    Moves
    342112
    19 Sep '20 07:52
    @bob-kramer said
    So you looked at the site, and I wasn't recommending the site.
    Did you also look into safe 5G, or were you only interested in another slam?
    I'm married to a retired telecommunications engineer who keeps up with anything happening in his world and has a lifetime of amateur radio interests, including marine and emergency radio transmission systems. He has studied all the 5G material available and tells me that there are a number of miscalculations and errors in it, particularly of scale and frequencies. It is his considered opinion that 5G is safe and i trust his judgement.
  11. Joined
    07 Mar '14
    Moves
    30400
    19 Sep '20 17:29
    @kewpie said
    I'm married to a retired telecommunications engineer who keeps up with anything happening in his world and has a lifetime of amateur radio interests, including marine and emergency radio transmission systems. He has studied all the 5G material available and tells me that there are a number of miscalculations and errors in it, particularly of scale and frequencies. It is his considered opinion that 5G is safe and i trust his judgement.
    I think oxygen deprivation wins this argument.
  12. SubscriberPonderable
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    564447
    20 Sep '20 05:40
    @bob-kramer said
    I think oxygen deprivation wins this argument.
    So you are not a scientist but you argue with the bonding energy of a d-pi,p-pi complex bond?



    If you really want to learn something look up typical bining energies in complexes. (Hint: Microwaving something is heating it up, not slicing bonds. Microwave spectroscopy is used to learn something due to the rotation of the excited molecules.
  13. Joined
    07 Mar '14
    Moves
    30400
    20 Sep '20 16:47
    I mistakenly wrote covfefe was for the antenna, though I get the impression it is for the core of transformers. Sillly me.
    I'm a mathematician and I fail to be convinced by your arguments.
  14. SubscriberKewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    Australia
    Joined
    20 Jan '09
    Moves
    342112
    21 Sep '20 05:58
    @bob-kramer said
    I mistakenly wrote covfefe was for the antenna, though I get the impression it is for the core of transformers. Sillly me.
    I'm a mathematician and I fail to be convinced by your arguments.
    Google the word "covfefe" and you'll discover you've fallen for a prank.
    It was trump's hamfisted attempt at typing the word coffee in a twitter post, no more than that. It's become a worldwide joke.
  15. Joined
    07 Mar '14
    Moves
    30400
    21 Sep '20 13:20
    @kewpie said
    Google the word "covfefe" and you'll discover you've fallen for a prank.
    It was trump's hamfisted attempt at typing the word coffee in a twitter post, no more than that. It's become a worldwide joke.
    You didn't google far enough.
    Try googling covfefe 5G; you will find research that ties the two together.
Back to Top