5g is just 3GPP 5th Generation. Its still Quadrature Amplitude Modulation using Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access with low latency and some other improvements.
I know, I worked for all carriers from analog FM to 5G. You could modulate HF with QAM but would be pretty much useless as CW. The point was N8Zi clearly does not know what he is talking about or using an MW oven for a cell phone.
I disagree with that. 600/700 Mhz has excellent range up to a 20-mile radius and can penetrate walls. Granted the MW frequencies have higher bandwidth carriers, but the range is a few blocks and forget penetration. Additionally, if a 600/700 site goes down, adjacent sites easily takeover with no rush to restore service. MW site goes down and you got a hole in coverage. When it comes to reliability, coverage, and ROI is no contest. MW frequencies will never provide the coverage of UHF no matter how much money you throw at it.
That capture was 10 kHz wide with 16.92 kbps AAC audio. Mode B 10 kHz is 206 ODFM carriers at 26.66 ms per symbol with a 5.33 ms guard interval, so 31.25 baud.
5G means the 5th Generation of wireless technology. 5G uses between 24 to 90 gigahertz frequency. Within the RF Radiation portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, the higher the frequency, the more dangerous it is to living organisms.
He talks about wifi, which is not 5G. Wifi frequencies mutagenic potential has been repeatedly disproved it is non ionizing radiation, at very low power. There is no mechanism to disrupt DNA molecules. Sorry. Try again.
5G cellular operates on 30GHz-300GHz and many Wi-Fi routers use the same frequencies, 57GHz - 66GHz. Therefore the physical damage caused by 5G would be quite similar to those of Wi-Fi routers. As far as the negative impacts to humans is concerned, there is far more peer reviewed evidence to prove it. But one can never receive an unbiased opinion from those who's income derives from that field. It would be like asking big pharmaceutical conglomerates if their "medicines" were toxic. Of course they will deny it. Yet all one has to do is turn on the TV and notice commercial breaks loaded with class action lawsuits against big pharma. Over and over again consumers are hyped up with the latest and greatest invention to makes our lives easier. Big corporations claim their product is safe, they reap massive profits but decades later the truth is exposed and citizens get stuck with the aftermath. How many trillions of gallons of toxic waste pollute our bodies and the environment yearly? Explain to me why the cases of autism, cancer and other diseases are skyrocketing. You claim exposure to RF is not harmful yet numerous health agencies, Doctors, Scientists, FCC including WHO have a different viewpoint. One can search online for the dangers of RF, 5G Wi-Fi and read thousands of highly credible sources exposing it, or read from big tech sponsored disinformation sites. I prefer those interested in health vs those only interested in profits.
World Health Organization WHO classifies Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields carcinogenic to humans. https://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/iarc-rf-carc/
I didn't say all RF, I said milliwatts of 13cm and 6cm. High power RF exposure is known to have significant bioactive effects, but is not mutagenic as you claim no they don't. Can you find a commercially available wifi device on 60GHz? Again., this band is dealing with milliwatts and heavy attenuation from oxygen molecules. So, really difficult to find the mutagenic mechanism - any suggestions? better diagnosis and reporting. are you saying these are also caused by RF exposure?
They exist, but not too popular since nothing pairs with them. The more popular use of 802.11ad is wireless HDMI. https://www.amazon.com/NETGEAR-Nighthawk-Quad-Stream-Quad-core-Compatible/dp/B01M12RE4A
This auction, and the 3.45 to 3.6 GHz follow-up auction, come as no surprise; we've even discuss them a few months back. The assumption that there will be an auction of 3.3-3.45 GHz or thereabouts has no basis in fact. None is planned. There continues (for some) to be a lack of understanding about '5G' . There is no unique frequency attached to '5G'. It is a 'fifth generation' outlay of new technologies, paired with new frequency bands, leveraged for greater channel capacities and speeds. This present auction was and is for some 'midband 5G' NOT 'mm 5G'. Scary speculations about 5G and various cancers are irrelevant to this OP. No 'mm' involved . If you want to scare people about RF cancer risks ,then start your own thread, and the assertions will be properly questioned in lieu of the facts. MO. Yours may differ. To us, as hams, the issue is what will happen to 3.3-3.45 GHz. Right now, nothing good. But IF it ever gets auctioned, it will be many years from now. As to speculations on other ham band losses. Yes, they will happen. If the bands of interest do not show use under the Part 97 mission, they will be scooped up over the next 5-10 years, for licensed and unlicensed use.. I started warning people about the loss of the 3.3 GHz band in 2004! Just assume the next re-allocations will follow a somewhat quicker timeline.... Can we stop it? Wrong question. Try : 'ARE WE USING IT'? 73 Chip W1YW
