5 ms·

I'm not a physicist or biologist but what's always made sense to me is that anytime you walk outside during the day you are bathed in broad spectrum radiation f

I'm not a physicist or biologist but what's always made sense to me is that anytime you walk outside during the day you are bathed in broad spectrum radiation from the sun. So anything weaker than the sun is probably safe enough. Anything a million or billion times weaker is probably a million or billion times safer. We already know when and how radios get dangerous (large transmission towers, microwave ovens, etc) and how to mitigate that danger. Inverse cube law and somesuch.

avidiax 2y ago
The sun is damaging because it contains ionizing radiation (radiation that is powerful enough to directly disassociate a molecule into ions). This is the UV portion of sunlight. UV starts at 800,000 GHz. The 6Ghz being discussed here is completely non-ionizing, not even comparable to UV. The only concern with 6Ghz is that is can also cause dielectric heating, which is the same as a microwave. But again, at 25mW, you can't even feel the heat from direct contact with the antenna, let alone a few meters away. Your exposure follows the inverse-square law [1], which means that it drops proportional to the square of the distance. So if it's not a problem at 10cm, it's 100x less of a non-problem at 1m. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law
rjegundo 2y ago
evolutionary argument is humans are aligned with broad spectrum radiation from the sun, but not the artificial forms which have different magnitudes in different frequencies. Eg: you are much less likely to get sunburn if you get plenty of natural (or artificial) infrared.
- kstrauser 2y ago
  There is no such thing as artificial forms of RF. They're all wiggling photons. If nature gave us a flute, and man discovered how to make a bass guitar, all though they sound different the only real difference is that the bass guitar is wiggling air molecules more slowly than a flute would. There is zero, nil, no distinction whatsoever between a "natural" and "synthetic" photon wiggling at a given frequency. > you are much less likely to get sunburn if you get plenty of natural (or artificial) infrared. I'm gonna need to see a source for that.
  - FollowingTheDao 2y ago
    > There is no such thing as artificial forms of RF. They're all wiggling photons. This is categorically untrue. Polarization: A Key Difference between Man-made and Natural Electromagnetic Fields, in regard to Biological Activity https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14914 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14914
    - avidiax 2y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38915555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38915555
    - kstrauser 2y ago
      Horseshit. Sorry, but there are times to be tactful, and times to be blunt, and this is bluntly idiotic. I got as far as 2 sentences in: > All types of man-made EMFs/EMR - in contrast to natural EMFs/EMR - are polarized. which is so unbelievably wrong, like, completely out of touch with reality levels of incorrect, that I see no value in reading further.
      - FollowingTheDao 2y ago
        Incorrect? What is incorrect? It looks like you do not know enough to comment with anything of substance. Linear Polarization Antennas in Radio and Wireless Communication Systems https://resources.system-analysis.cadence.com/blog/msa2021-linear-polarization-antennas-in-radio-and-wireless-communication-systems https://resources.system-analysis.cadence.com/blog/msa2021-l... and https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8811421 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8811421
        kstrauser 2y ago
        I have an FCC certification vouching that I know what those words mean. Your linked diatribe says, quote, "All types of man-made EMFs/EMR". All. Antennas are polarized because that's the easiest way to build them, and the polarization has nice properties. A standard incandescent lightbulb creates about 100W of unpolarized RF from around 400THz to 750THz. It is manmade, it's an RF emitter, it is not polarized, and it's something everyone older than the age of around 10 has spent their entire lives around. So either the author is completely wrong in sentence number 2, or they're implying that visible light isn't RF. Either way, they're wrong, and you can ignore the rest of their claims.

avidiax 2y ago

The sun is damaging because it contains ionizing radiation (radiation that is powerful enough to directly disassociate a molecule into ions). This is the UV portion of sunlight. UV starts at 800,000 GHz. The 6Ghz being discussed here is completely non-ionizing, not even comparable to UV. The only concern with 6Ghz is that is can also cause dielectric heating, which is the same as a microwave. But again, at 25mW, you can't even feel the heat from direct contact with the antenna, let alone a few meters away. Your exposure follows the inverse-square law [1], which means that it drops proportional to the square of the distance. So if it's not a problem at 10cm, it's 100x less of a non-problem at 1m. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law

rjegundo 2y ago

evolutionary argument is humans are aligned with broad spectrum radiation from the sun, but not the artificial forms which have different magnitudes in different frequencies. Eg: you are much less likely to get sunburn if you get plenty of natural (or artificial) infrared.

kstrauser 2y ago
There is no such thing as artificial forms of RF. They're all wiggling photons. If nature gave us a flute, and man discovered how to make a bass guitar, all though they sound different the only real difference is that the bass guitar is wiggling air molecules more slowly than a flute would. There is zero, nil, no distinction whatsoever between a "natural" and "synthetic" photon wiggling at a given frequency. > you are much less likely to get sunburn if you get plenty of natural (or artificial) infrared. I'm gonna need to see a source for that.
- FollowingTheDao 2y ago
  > There is no such thing as artificial forms of RF. They're all wiggling photons. This is categorically untrue. Polarization: A Key Difference between Man-made and Natural Electromagnetic Fields, in regard to Biological Activity https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14914 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14914
  - avidiax 2y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38915555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38915555
  - kstrauser 2y ago
    Horseshit. Sorry, but there are times to be tactful, and times to be blunt, and this is bluntly idiotic. I got as far as 2 sentences in: > All types of man-made EMFs/EMR - in contrast to natural EMFs/EMR - are polarized. which is so unbelievably wrong, like, completely out of touch with reality levels of incorrect, that I see no value in reading further.
    - FollowingTheDao 2y ago
      Incorrect? What is incorrect? It looks like you do not know enough to comment with anything of substance. Linear Polarization Antennas in Radio and Wireless Communication Systems https://resources.system-analysis.cadence.com/blog/msa2021-linear-polarization-antennas-in-radio-and-wireless-communication-systems https://resources.system-analysis.cadence.com/blog/msa2021-l... and https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8811421 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8811421
      - kstrauser 2y ago
        I have an FCC certification vouching that I know what those words mean. Your linked diatribe says, quote, "All types of man-made EMFs/EMR". All. Antennas are polarized because that's the easiest way to build them, and the polarization has nice properties. A standard incandescent lightbulb creates about 100W of unpolarized RF from around 400THz to 750THz. It is manmade, it's an RF emitter, it is not polarized, and it's something everyone older than the age of around 10 has spent their entire lives around. So either the author is completely wrong in sentence number 2, or they're implying that visible light isn't RF. Either way, they're wrong, and you can ignore the rest of their claims.