Extinction Level Event: 5G. Death by the trillions

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Administrator
Joined 2004
Paid Member
Actually, they did make a VW Bug that had excellent heat in the winter. It had a gas burner under the rear seat and it would blow hot air almost right away. It was hell on your fuel economy, and didn't smell so good either. But, up here in Canada during the winters we used to have, it was a wonderful option.

-Chris
 
I really dont care about the IoT, as I think most of it is pure rubbish.

There are several useful applications where IoT can come in handy. Most of what is being suggested however is unneeded, unwanted or flat out scary.......self driving cars linked together over the cell network is the biggie......hundreds of cars zooming down the interstate on autopilot relying on their cell signals, and the network hiccups.....worse than a loose semi truck in an ice storm.

A high school friend had a 1959 VW bug. The heat came from a shroud around the cylinder head. An oil leak made using the heater a rather stinky ride.....but still better than a leaky head gasket. Fortunately we lived in Miami Florida where you might need heat one or two days a year.........having the battery spark up the rear seat where I was sitting......that will heat your backside in a hurry.
 
>Actually, they did make a VW Bug that had excellent heat in the winter.

I had one of those. During college, in Buffalo NY. I got really, really drunk at a party one winter, made my way to the VW and switched on the under the bonnet gas heater, then proceeded to pass out. I woke several hours later, warm as toast, then drove back to my apartment.

The next time I turned it on the whole car immediately filled with the most obnoxious fumes. I pulled over immediately, opened the bonnet. There was a flexible hose that carried the exhaust fumes outside, exiting into the left wheel well. It had disintegrated and was now exhausting directly under the bonnet - and into the car. I could have just never woke up previously. One of those "but why was there only one set of footprints" kind of things.

These days, maybe my 5G personal carbon monoxide monitor (paid subscription service) could have alerted someone and provided GPS coordinates and driving instructions to come save me!

My best friend in high school had one of those Suzuki 500 two strokes, I swear it was a twin. For some reason I could do the longest burn out patch with that thing - I recall another friend wrecking on his Honda 750 in attempt to beat the length I put down with it. I dont know what it was about that bike, but it seemed I could spin the rear tire on pavement indefinitely.
 
More fuel for the fire...

Nothing about RF, more about the real issue. We now have nearly two generations of humans who have never experiences life WITHOUT a little plastic device of some sort. What kind of world wide withdrawal will occur when the networks go dark? \

North America will lead the world in 5G adoption by 2025

I see constant advertising on TV from the major US phone networks touting their "5G" devices. Few, if any can actually use the millimeter wave technology, which only exists in a few select markets. Oddly T-Mobile who now owns a large chunk of un-tapped 600 MHz TV spectrum is poised for the largest capacity upgrade in the near term.
 
Now this is solid post.

billshurv. There are no stats about the effects of emf in the field causing ill health and death because no one is looking for it. How many people have cancer these days, often visited upon them out of the blue? Here are some references to peer reviewed studies Scientific studies on EMFs - Powerwatch. There is much more if you choose to look. Lloyds will not insure emf technologies, Swiss Re say "Existing concerns regarding potential negative health effects from electromagnetic fields (EMF) are only likely to increase. An uptick in liability claims could be a potential long-term consequence."
Remember, thermal effects are not the biggest issue because that is more understood and controllable. It's the resonant ,biochemical effects that are the most pernicious. Interference with cell membrane calcium channel voltage gating is an identified mechanism of emf effect that has been identified. This has multiple consequences on cell and tissue metabolism.
Perhaps you can offer some references to independent safety studies for 5G?


Most of us heard about the sailor with the Candy bar. But that Calisim thing I am going to have to look up.

Thank you!
 
77 Ghz Radar?

Actually people ARE looking for it, and so far have found nothing. Doesn't stop the nut brigade claiming things and trying to sell you snake oil to protect yourself Products - EMFields Solutions


When I worked in the cellular industry my boss had 9 kids. Should I claim radiation increases fertility?



If you want someone to be scared of, be scared of Facebook and google as they really DO track your every move. Telcos are too inept to be able to do that.



Oh and shout at every Tesla owner behind you as you get a nice blast of 77GHz radar

I'm going to have to look that up. :)
 
First off, that article that the first post inked to if full of misinformation. There is NO WAY that a user worn or hand held device will ever emit 20 watts of RF power on ANY frequency. Why, because it would require a HUGE battery.

The maximum RF power for a current vintage 4G LTE phone is 200 milliwatts. The RF power amp inside runs at about 30% efficiency at full power, and lower efficiency when operating at a lower power. The efficiency is even lower at the 5 to 8 GHz frequency band where the user device will transmit. So to make 20 watts at an efficiency of 20 to 25 % would require a battery of producing 80 to 100 watts of power. The AVERAGE phone transmits for 10% of the time its turned on, and yes, much of this IS "quiet" transmissions between the device and the cell tower giving up your location and a whole lot more. You are already being tracked, and your information is already being sold.

So at a 10% transmission time, your 20 watt phone would need a 8 to 10 watt hour battery for each hour of use.

True, the range of a 5G user device is quite short, so there would need to be a lot more cell sites, each with a low power level, AND they would each need to be able to communicate with each other. The cellular term is backhaul, short for hauling all that data back to the internet backbone. That is where the higher frequencies and power levels come into play. Most of this energy will be aimed at the next tower, not at people.

So, 5G is being rolled out in a few cities around the USA and other countries. We can get shiny new phones that may work on some of these new 5G towers.......

But, we already have a quietly unleashed unnamed network rolled out in most of the USA today with phones available now that function in frequency bands in the 2.4 and 5 GHz spectrum. There are already thousands of microcells broadcasting these evil 5 GHz signals into our bodies, yet nobody is crying foul. I don't even have a compatible phone, yet there is one of these 5 GHz microcells inside my house located about 15 feet from where I'm sitting.

What? How can this be? Does your cable TV company offer "cell" service? Comcast does, and so do several others. Comcast has quietly built out a microcell network using their own cable network for backhaul without building (or leasing) a single tower. All of their newer data / phone modems are microcells. Whenever a Comcast voice phone is within range of a Comcast WiFi signal, it uses that for voice, text and data. That's why even here in small town America, Comcast provides free WiFi along "main street" for any Comcast customer. When that phone wanders far from Comcast WiFi, it roams on Verizon.

There are studies that show that RF exposure is possibly harmful, and those that say it isn't. Truth is, we really don't know, so yes, there is a huge human experiment going on, but I would be far more worried about TV stations with 1 MILLION WATTS of effective radiated power per channel, and other strong RF sources than low powered phones......but then I don't spend much time using my phone.....and I was a cell phone engineer before I retired.


Now this is a good post.
 
QUALITY POST.

500 to 1000 watts of power at 2.45 GHz are focused into the chicken.....yes it's toast.



I spent 41 years of my career working at Motorola, several of those years were in cell phone design. Most were in two way radio design where the power levels are much higher. There were several researchers on staff where I worked including at least one with a PHD in microbiology doing testing on animals and human cadavers to explore the effects of RF exposure.... police walkie talkies pumping out 5 watts of power continuously strapped to the head of several pigs for their entire natural lives failed to make bacon, or produce any identifiable tissue damage.

I however still remain cautious and don't spend too much time with a phone to my head. My average phone bill shows 30 to 45 minutes of talk time per month....unfortunately my daughter's bill shows thousands.

Assuming 20 watts of 5G is focused on your head (not actually possible yet)
the RF energy present at your head from a mile or so away is FAR LESS than the 200 milliwatts that currently slapped to the head of a 4G phone user.



Each flat plate antenna actually has many small patch antennas embedded inside. By using the principles of beam interference the phase of the electrical signal into each patch can be adjusted such that the signals from a few of the patches can be steered toward a target. This principle has been used in radar for some time.

A new technology called MIMO (multi in, multi out) allows for several individual bidirectional steered beams from each plate antenna. The actual beamwidth of each beam varies with the number of individual antenna element employed at the time, as with any directional antenna. Those flat white plates you currently see on top of a 3G or 4G cell tower already use a fixed version of beam focusing.



The food, chemical, and plastics / polymers industries are far worse...many of their effects are well known, but kept quiet.

Do you know that food industry calories do NOT equal chemistry or physics textbook calories. One food label calorie = 1000 textbook calorie.....so yes that meal from McD's actually contains 1 MILLION calories...eat up! Don't forget a side order of GMO produced glyphosate (Roundup) residue.

5G is so far down the list it isn't worth worrying about.

Damn.. You learn more stuff everyday. Cool.
 
It's easy to sit back and talk....but a picture is worth...I don't know, with inflation, maybe 100 words.

I decided to do a 5 minute simple UNCONTROLLED, and therefore unscientific experiment. I performed similar experiments with far better equipment under more controlled conditions when I had Motorola's lab equipment and budget behind me.

Lesson learned....when you are standing in a field full of farm animals with a pile of test equipment on a cart powered by batteries and an inverter, be careful where you set your notebook. The goats will eat it and you will have to do all of the days testing over.

Here I simply fired up my spectrum analyzer, set it to sweep from 10 KHz to 3.2 GHz, and display the peak amplitude of every signal it finds in that frequency range over a 10 minute time period. In this mode a short burst for a few milliseconds will show at its highest value, as will a continuous signal. The continuous signals at lower amplitude will contain more total energy than short bursts at a higher level when both are averaged over time. Such a test can be done even with this analyzer, but it would take several hours. I an also in my basement lab, which is pretty well shielded from the weak signals outside the house. I have done this outdoors in my car, but I was concentrating on cell tower signals, and thus did not photograph any of the oddball RF stuff.

To extend the setup's dynamic range I put a cheap ($10 on Amazon) "30 db" RF amp in front of the analyzer. It does have 30 db of gain below 500 MHz, but it drops slowly to about 15 db of gain at 2 GHz and 5 db of gain at 3.2 GHz. The antenna I used is a flat plate designed for the US cellular bands. It's gain peaks at 800 MHz and at 1.8 GHz, with far less gain at other frequencies, but it was sitting on my workbench.

The test setup and screen picture are included.

The analyzer scans from 10 KHz to 3.2 GHz each division across the bottom of the screen is about 320 MHz.

The strongest signal on the display is at roughly 1.9 GHz. It is the random ping from my wife's iPHONE which is on a table about 20 feet from the antenna. It displays at -50 dbm on the analyzer, but the actual signal is probably about 10 - 20 db weaker due to amp and antenna gain.

The second strongest group of signals are the WiFi router, at 2.4 GHz. The router is about 10 feet from the antenna. My guess is that these signals are actually stronger than the phone pings, but the amp has little gain at this frequency and the antenna should be lossy at this frequency to avoid bluetooth interference.

Note the low frequency crud below about 1.2 GHz. ALL of this originates inside the house with one exception. The marker displays the signal from the smart meter. I have taken a portable spectrum analyzer to the meter to confirm the frequency.

Much of the low frequency stuff is leakage from the cable TV system. It goes away when I disconnect the cable from their distribution amp. Over a year ago I chased down some of the other unintentional radiators, and found that some of the TV sets radiate RF when they are turned OFF! The worst offender is an old Sony that was causing interference with ham radio reception on 146 MHz. There is a strong peak at 272 MHz. This is actually a bunch of single frequency signals scattered from 265 to 290 MHz and comes from the cable system. The antenna is I am using is not designed for these frequencies, but the RF amp has a lot of gain, so the actual signal level is unknown, but all of the crud averaged together over time could be the strongest offender here.

I am including some more pictures taken from the field where the "goats ate my homework." This was a 6 month exercise in chasing down interference caused by cellular systems to police radios. My final report on the matter ran 20 some pages and I had borrowed the title from a popular book / movie for obvious reasons......"The Two Towers." This particular location was the western most cell site in the area which borders on the Everglades swamp. The RF power for the west facing antennas was cranked up to the maximum to cover the 'glades. This was one of the worst interference related sites in the country at the time.

Now this sounds like something I have done in the past with lower grade hardware.

Thank you for sharing this! Love it when the Engineers come out and play!
 
Here is a little more info for those who want to do some simple testing yourself.

Every cell phone back to 2G takes constant signal strength measurements on the cell it is receiving from, AND on several "neighbor cell" which the phone could possibly hand over the call to. Most phones / networks use different cells and frequency bands for phone calls VS data traffic.

You can get an app for your phone that will display this data. I use an app called Network Cell Info which will display the data for phone calls when you are actually in a call, and data traffic when not in a call. Like any app it can only display the data for the network you are actually authorized to use. My phone is on AT&T so it will show me all the AT&T signals that my phone is currently receiving. The spectrum analyzer has told me that AT&T uses band 30 at 2.3 GHz, but my cheap phone does not cover this band so it will not be displayed.

It will measure the signal strength. This is the power delivered from the tower to the phone, and therefore into the human holding the phone. This is displayed on a "speedometer" type scale and updates quickly ar you move through cell coverage, making it easy to find the towers. I have used this to find the two cell sites that serve my rural area. They are cranked up to somewhere near maximum power to serve the hilly country side surrounding the town. The tower site does not reach my house about 2 miles away due to severe blockage. The site on the building does barely on dry days, and in winter when the trees are bare. During the summer, I get no usable signal.

It is measured in dbm which is a log scale exactly the same as audio power. 0 dbm is a strong RF signal at 1 milliwatt of power. Each 10 dbm represents a factor of 10 in power, so that -10 dbm is 100 microwatts, -20 dmb is 10 microwatts, -30dbm is 1 microwatt, -60 dbm is 1 nanowatt, -90 dbm is 1 pico watt, and -120 dbm is 1 femtowatt.

Note that the scale starts (upper limit) at -45 dbm, thus the maximum expected signal from a tower will be less than 60 NANOWATTS.

I have found an AT&T cell site in town. It uses some flat plate antennas mounted on the side of a building approximately 60 feet above the street below. They can be seen in the picture. I drove and walked around the area until I found the strongest signal on the ground. The signal in my car was slightly stronger than the same spot walking. The strongest signal seen from the city site was -63 dbm or 2 NANOWATTS of RF power.

There is a tower on a hill about 300 feet above the city and 400 feet above the OHIO river. I drove nearly every passable road surrounding that tower measuring it's many signals with the spectrum analyzer and phone app. The strongest on ground signal was in the -84 dbm range, about 5 picowatts.

The same app can measure the signal strength of the WiFi signal that your phone receives. This photo shows that there are two WiFi signals here at my computer. The weaker one is the 5.7 GHz WiFi signal at -44 dbm and the
stronger is the 2.46 GHz WiFi signal at -32 dbm (about two microwatts). These signals are about 1000 times stronger than any cellular signal I can find on the ground today.

It has been stated that the signals from the tower to the user for 5G will be on par with, or weaker than the current 4G signals. 5G will operate in spectrum from 4 to 8 GHz. Why should I worry about some future signals which should be 1000 times weaker than what's in my house NOW!


I was all into the TIn foil hat thing. Then I did some real tests as well. After that? I slept pretty well.

I just turned off why COmcast modem wifi, and use my own setup. THat Xfinity radio is WAY to loud in my room. And it barely works right as it is.

Again thank you for the data and post. Really cool!
 
A number of new cars these days leave the factory with 3 Sims installed for different purposes. Current Jag models have 23 antennas!


I did not know that. I know the newer cars have all sorts of stuff and heard about and know all about Onstar. But this? I did not know.

Something to look up later and see how I can hack it.

Wonder if those sim cards can be used for data? Hmm. :)
 
I remember as a kid one of the local hoons buying one of those (around 1975) and showing off down the main street of town - a small country town of a few hundred residents.

At night, he accelerated like a rocket away from us and a couple of the exhaust baffles came out of the exhaust and caused sparks as they slid along the tarmac while he disappeared into the distance. Obviously the scream turned into a bellow. We thought this thing was the fastest bike ever especially with the enhanced effects!

As an adult I realised they must've been left unsecured, but back then we thought it was just the sheer acceleration.







One of the guys in my neighborhood had a Kawasaki KZ500 3 cylinder two stroke. This was 1972 maybe. On a good cold day it could beat a Honda 750 4 cylinder 4 stroke.....but you could hear it from over a mile away when it was moving away from you at nearly 10,000 RPM.
 
Most of us heard about the sailor with the Candy bar.

Early on in the cold war period a radar system called Distant Early Warning radar was deployed. It became known as the DEW line since there was a line of them to "watch" for missile launches from the Soviet Union.

The largest segment of the line stretched out from Alaska across northern Canada along the artic circle, and into Greenland. It began operations in the 1950's and ran continuously into the 1990's or later. It cranked out 100 KW pulses with averaged power levels in the 500+ watt range. The frequency was somewhere in the 1 to 2 GHz range (don't remember). These are frequencies similar to today's cell phones, with MUCH bigger power levels.

It was often manned by GI's who were stationed in some really cold places for months at a time. It became common practice to stand in front of the transmitting antenna to keep warm. A candy bar was often used as a warning sensor....time to move on.

Many of these GI's were followed medically for their remaining lives since they has VA health insurance. A study of these people's medical records was performed somewhere in the late 90's or early 2000's. I had a copy of it since I was a cell phone design engineer at the time.

The only medical issue among these people that was a statistically significant outlier was cataracts. Did being nuked with microwaves cause the cataracts? Did the fact that no other issues were found make playing with high level RF safe?

One study can not determine either of these. Nor can several uncontrolled studies. The best course of action is to limit your exposure to known malicious situations, and respect those that are unknown, but suspicious.

I would worry much more about daily consumption of food from McD, than a cell phone......but my phone bill shows less than 50 minutes per month.

I just turned off why COmcast modem wifi, and use my own setup. THat Xfinity radio is WAY to loud in my room.

That was the surprise big hitter in my house. I have relocated it to be as far as possible from the usual human hangouts in the house. It still puts more RF into the house than everything else combined, and is stronger than all of the cell signals that I can find anywhere in town.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.