13 ms·

The sun has ionizing radiations, this doesn't Weird that we're regulating for 4W/kg of non-ionizing radiations

NavinF 3y ago
It's the precautionary principle at work. Of course most people never consider the negative effects of such alarmist behavior. There are some pretty good examples on the wiki showing this happening throughout history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle#Criticisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle#Critic...
stinos 3y ago
Weird that we're regulating for that Not sure if you really mean that, but how is that so weird? It's a not man-made phenomenon and the regulation would go against freedom in far more serious ways than this regulation does. Likewise there is (in some countries) regulation against solarbeds but nog against the sun. However there is advice everywhere on how to deal with the sun: stay out of it at certain times and places. If you can and want.
- sebstefan 3y ago
  The "that" was referring to the regulation of 4W/kg for non-ionizing radiations in consumer electronics, not the sun Maybe the phrasing was ambiguous
  - stinos 3y ago
    Oh, right, yes I interpreted it the other way. Sorry but too late to edit or delete my comment..
contravariant 3y ago
Is that the limit? Because it sounds like a lot, it's like hitting someone with a tennis ball every second. (unless of course I'm misunderstanding the definition)
- kaba0 3y ago
  Not sure how you calculated that, but it’s more like standing beneath a quite strong LED lamp (~300W for around 80 kilos). The reason it is relatively easy to surpass the limit in a phone is that you use it from quite close, and the energy density decreases exponentially with distance.
  - contravariant 3y ago
    I remember a fast tennis ball being something around 100J. So something like 300W for a human body seems like quite a bit of energy. But maybe it's not like poison where it's maximum amount per kilogram bodyweight, but it's more like the maximum for any particular kilogram of tissue. But even when pelting someone with uniform light rather than physical objects, a 300W IR lamp would be pretty noticeably warm I think. Anyway it was more than I thought. I was expecting some figure that could easily be dismissed as 'impossible to cause any physical effect, let alone harm'.
    - NavinF 3y ago
      Humans are watercooled so we can dissipate small amounts of heat with zero side effects. It's all about temperature. You can easily get an RF burn[0] if you climb a cell tower and get extremely close to the antenna, but nothing happens if you hold a wifi router or phone that's transmitting at max power 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_burn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_burn
  - wnoise 3y ago
    *geometrically
- sebstefan 3y ago
  In terms of heat, 4 joules would heat 27g of water (the weight of a ballsack) by 0.14°C Maybe that's why
  - BenjiWiebe 3y ago

It's the precautionary principle at work. Of course most people never consider the negative effects of such alarmist behavior. There are some pretty good examples on the wiki showing this happening throughout history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle#Criticisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle#Critic...

stinos 3y ago

Weird that we're regulating for that Not sure if you really mean that, but how is that so weird? It's a not man-made phenomenon and the regulation would go against freedom in far more serious ways than this regulation does. Likewise there is (in some countries) regulation against solarbeds but nog against the sun. However there is advice everywhere on how to deal with the sun: stay out of it at certain times and places. If you can and want.

sebstefan 3y ago
The "that" was referring to the regulation of 4W/kg for non-ionizing radiations in consumer electronics, not the sun Maybe the phrasing was ambiguous
- stinos 3y ago
  Oh, right, yes I interpreted it the other way. Sorry but too late to edit or delete my comment..

contravariant 3y ago

Is that the limit? Because it sounds like a lot, it's like hitting someone with a tennis ball every second. (unless of course I'm misunderstanding the definition)

kaba0 3y ago
Not sure how you calculated that, but it’s more like standing beneath a quite strong LED lamp (~300W for around 80 kilos). The reason it is relatively easy to surpass the limit in a phone is that you use it from quite close, and the energy density decreases exponentially with distance.
- contravariant 3y ago
  I remember a fast tennis ball being something around 100J. So something like 300W for a human body seems like quite a bit of energy. But maybe it's not like poison where it's maximum amount per kilogram bodyweight, but it's more like the maximum for any particular kilogram of tissue. But even when pelting someone with uniform light rather than physical objects, a 300W IR lamp would be pretty noticeably warm I think. Anyway it was more than I thought. I was expecting some figure that could easily be dismissed as 'impossible to cause any physical effect, let alone harm'.
  - NavinF 3y ago
    Humans are watercooled so we can dissipate small amounts of heat with zero side effects. It's all about temperature. You can easily get an RF burn[0] if you climb a cell tower and get extremely close to the antenna, but nothing happens if you hold a wifi router or phone that's transmitting at max power 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_burn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_burn
- wnoise 3y ago
  *geometrically
sebstefan 3y ago
In terms of heat, 4 joules would heat 27g of water (the weight of a ballsack) by 0.14°C Maybe that's why
- BenjiWiebe 3y ago