/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9939901
http://www.5gappeal.eu Claims that radiowaves are harmful, yet they cannot provide proof. So mostlikely theyre full of shit

>>9939901
>alleged risks of 5G technology
Such as? Are the literal tinfoiler brainlets riled up again about non-ionizing radiation?

>>9939901
>cannot provide proof.

Can't even provide evidence.

But that does not matter -- the EU is governed by an increasingly Luddite power structure. Tech is bad, to them.

>>9939929
>>9939932
No need for these kneejerk reactions, young fedoralords.

>>9939901
GOD DAMNIT. Why are you fags spamming all my favorite boards with this BS!?!?!?

>>9939901
Fact is, with towers located every 100 meters it will be easy to use this technology to kill citizens.

>>9939920
I would like to disagree, but I won't claim to know all. 5G will use greater frequencies than 4G LTE, Wi-Fi, or microwave ovens. 5G antennae will have to be much closer to populate areas than even cell towers, I believe; the greater the frequency, at the same power, the shorter the distance the waves will propagate in our atmosphere. So 5G will require enough power, likely more than 4G, to be effective, and towers be placed closer than cell towers, maybe as close as long-range Wi-Fi access points?

I know certainly that microwave ovens use ~2.4 GHz, same as Wi-Fi, but take input power from 100s of Watts to 1 kW, while traditional Wi-Fi devices use 1s to 10s of Watts. As for output power, I would err on the safe side knowing little (ex: staying 5 feet away at least while the oven operates), and for Wi-Fi, I could care less. I also believe that cellular data uses 2.1 GHz and has to output 10s of Watts to reach cell towers. If that's true, I'm not keeping my phone next to my head all the time, and use Wi-Fi for calls when I'm at home (let's be honest, I'd forget to do this if I wasn't unemployed right now).

>>9939901
>moon landings were fake
>climate change is hoax
>evolution isn't real
>vaccines cause autism
>nukes don't exist
>the earth is flat
>5G causes cancer
It's the latest conspiratard theory in a long line of conspiracies for people who either have a low IQ or severe mental health issues and need a distraction from their regular entertainment of reality TV and American football
for example see>>9939989

>>9939999
How did rob ford get cancer?

I would love for there to be a discussion about 5G, and assurance of it's safety, if it is. It very well could be. All I know is microwaves heat water, and it uses 2.4 GHz as does Wi-Fi, and we're made of water. In the end, this is /g/, so whatever.

>>9939999
I don't believe in any of those conspiracies, but I would want discussion about 5G and it's health effects. I want to be disproven because I have no medical or physics experience.

Climate change has to exist I mean come on. lol

>>9940012
Microwave ovens emit hundreds to a thousand watts of microwave radiation in a small container that is reflective to microwaves. Cell phones emit like a couple watts. It's not a health issue.

>>9939999
Checked.

>>9940012
>>9939997
Ok, first off, you completely overestimated the wifi power output. Wifi does not put out 1 to 10 watts for its signal output, it's far far less. I just pulled the data from my linksys router (a standard consumer router), and right now it's outputting 71 mW (that is 0.071 watt) for the entire signal. Contrast that to a microwave oven which as you said is usually about 1 kW. That means my wifi router has the output of 0.000071 of a typical microwave oven. Now, further contrast that a microwave oven takes that 1 kW and puts it into a compressed area of 1 cubic foot (to heat your water or food), whereas the wifi router takes 0.000071 kW and spreads it across several thousand cubic feet.

This is why the whole wifi is bad or 5G is bad is just a dumb meme. If you do the math on the 5G you'll find out that an average dental x-ray is going to be far more likely to give you an issue than if you sat on top of a 5G transmitter for 10 years straight.

>>9940032
Alright. I guess was thinking of cell towers' output, with the figure 10s of Watts. With 4G and Wi-Fi, I won't be changing my habits, 5G has me most concerned.

>>9940043
So you’re saying, it gives cancer

>>9940047
No... reread what I said.

>>9939901
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAfKeHB9Gq4

>>9940044
If 5G really has you that concerned, there is a simple solution.

Just get a nice piece of tinfoil and fashion it into a hat. This is reflective to microwaves and should keep you safe from any ill effects you might believe it to have.

>>9939929
Wasn't there an anon posting a study all the time on /sci/ more than a year ago that showed non-ionizing radiation still caused problems?

While it is poor logic for me to say this, standing in full sunlight puts you at more risk of anything else cancer related.

>>9940044
You realize 5G is still about 1000x lower frequency than visible light right?

>>9939901
Is it banned in Israel? If yes, it causes cancer and you need to die for it is written in the Talmud: "even the best of the gentiles should all be killed".

>>9939901
The funny about this is that all these people complaining about cell phone towers don't say anything about weather radar and military search and track radars, which output a far greater amount of energy because they aren't meant to transmit data, but to very brightly illuminate anything they'd like to detect and at incredibly huge ranges.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XbLz0L6UdI

>>9940043
I appreciate the clarification.

>>9940066
Who's paying you to make these posts?

>>9940043
>cubic foot
Stopped reading there

>>9940238
My apologies, I do prefer the metric system. But burger units are ingrained in my subconscious

>believing wireless radio communication is a manmade concept
>believing no one would lie, ever, under any circumstance, certainly not about the origins of wireless, and most definitely not about harmful side effects
>implying we literally live in a perfect world and there exists no precedence on lies.

>>9940325
it's basic quantum physics, anything below visible light, is simply not going to have the required energy to be ionizing radiation. You are essentially invisible to radiation at that frequency. And for the few atoms in your body that do by chance absorb some of those photons, it will simply be radiated as heat. And even then, that heat will be 1000x less intense than sitting next to the 60w bulb in your desk lamp.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod4.html#c1

>>9940388
>only ionizing radiation can have any effect on physical matter
Right. Nice .edu link; really adds credibility to your valuable contribution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bwgwe01SIMc

>>9940061

You should meet my brother.

>be March
>Cumcast internet goes out for few days
>leave WiFi AP's on, to connect to home media servers
>afternoon, dad and I are talking about our day his work
>big bro comes by and says "hey I'm real glad the internet is out I feel so much better WiFi isn't on feels good"
>dad and I snort and reply immediately, disagree with him
>bro's face when

Heh, you're a funny guy. For real, I'm no conspiracy theorist, I just have some skepticism is all. Even my over-estimations we're true/even if it mattered, if I shut off my phone or senpai's Wi-Fi, I'd be fucked (add that I'm tied to my phone). Living in a metropolitan area, radiowaves are everywhere.

>>9940065
You're right.

>>9939999
Too bad for you that I was top grade in all my classes and every one of those greentexts is the unbiased truth.

>>9940408

>>9940414
>all of those believed anyone outside their known region were barbaric being that must be killed on the spot
Good, since you aren't from all of them simultaneously please end your larping life.

>>9939901

Ooh, scary larger bandwidth!

>>9939901
>Concerns over health effects from higher radiation exposure include potential neurological impacts, infertility, and cancer.
>potential neurological impacts
does that include mind control along with the usual location tracking, net usage, always on audio and video uploading to the google hive mind?

>>9939929
not that i care about 5g at all but just since you mentioned it i think there have been more than a few papers showing that non-ionizing radiation does in fact affect cells
something about the calcium ion transport channels in cell membranes being activated when they shouldn't

>>9940428
>non-ionizing radiation
of course non-ionizing radiation can effect a cell, but the point is it won't eject electrons from any of the atoms as ionizing radiation would, only a negligible amount of heat would be produced from the interaction, and it's far less energy than any type of non-ionizing radiation that a cell would encounter from the visible spectrum

>>9940009
um.. wasn't he a drug addict/alcoholic?

>>9939901
It doesn't matter what i think of certain technology because my opinion won't change the outcome.

>>9939999
Quads of truth

>>9940064
He was a schizo tweaker. Someone found a bunch of his other posts where he admitted to having hallucinations and posting on /sci/ while tripping.

>>9940032
Cell phones are around 500mW max in the US

Given that in most undergrad chemistry courses there is an entire subject dedicated to how em waves interact with matter I'd love to hear the spectroscopic justification for this claim

>>9941508
Quantum electrodynamics is the name of the subject. And there isn't a justification, it's just more fear mongering from conspiracy theorists.

>>9939901
They're the same retards who thought 3G & 4G caused problems, did it ever? no.

>>9941533
It is not fear mongering at all. Low frequency waves do interact with matter. However it is so insignificant that it will never harm you. Organisms have been bombarded with low frequency waves since life first started. If only schizophrenics were more afraid of UV waves. Health care cost would definitely go down.