/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14664947

Ok you can disregard the conspiracies above.

===IS 5G DANGEROUS?!!?!?!?!?===
Short answer: Sorta but not really
Long answer: While 5G poses no threat to people for the most part, it can still damage your testicles and kill sperm. People have their phones in their pockets right next to their balls so that is a concern. On top of that the waves can over time damage eyes but there is a low chance of there being enough of it to damage your eyes, you'd have to be on the phone for hours and your phone probably doesn't emit/recieve enough to damage eyes anyway.
What about cancer? Well although there needs to be more research most evidence points to 5G not being able to cause cancer. So you don't have to worry about cancer, it is mainly people who don't understand it who scream "carcinogen"

Speculation: 5G could possibly be dangerous to smaller organisms such as insects but yet again, more research is needed and this is just speculation.
This is my personal speculation, what does /sci/ think about 5G on brain tissue since it can harm testicles?

Conclusion: 5G is all around pretty safe except for testicle tissue and the waves MAY be harmful to eyes but the doseage is unlikely to have any affect at all. It also will not give you cancer.

If we just ignore mechanical constraints you could make text "roll" from side to side faster than light but you couldn't send any information faster than light. It would be just a neat trick. Nothing would really move faster tha light.

>>10693402
>Well no, he's right...
No he isn't which you explain literally in the second half of your sentence.
>albeit only at levels far higher than we're exposed to daily

Sometimes it's that simple, but it's important to seperate the concepts of reversing a derivative and finding an area/volume/hypervolume. The fundamental theorem of calculus does relate them, and the antiderivative is a good starter for integration.

>>10456253