"Memorization is not so important anymore because the information is free and available at all the time, what we need is a faculty of discernment" Well said!
@Roger Baker the society doesnt need thinkers. They need workers. The person who created free education said so himself so. Its no wonder we have tons of idiots today. Memory is unreliable imo and the brain power is better off doing critical thinking than retaining memories. Just a little thought , what do you guys think?
@@hdhsbfhsudjehxhdns3431 Memorization does not interfere with thinking capability. If any, it may increase it because of having more context information in mind and considering it in problem solving. Where it could interfere aswell is time. Don't spend so much time on memorization that you don't have time left to think.
*I worry that, especially as the Millennium edges nearer, pseudoscience and superstition will seem year by year more tempting, the siren song of unreason more sonorous and attractive. Where have we heard it before? Whenever our ethnic or national prejudices are aroused, in times of scarcity, during challenges to national self-esteem or nerve, when we agonize about our diminished cosmic place and purpose, or when fanaticism is bubbling up around us - then, habits of thought familiar from ages past reach for the controls. The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir.* _- Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark_
Thanks for explaining a bit man, I'm still on the fence regarding the safety. Even though you aren't involved in research on safety, would you put forward ideas if you thought they would be worth investigating? Or ideas on shielding/minimising damage to people/wildlife which are near antennas, and more importantly I guess, wifi boxes? If the signal is 5million times weaker 2 metres away, that means it must be relatively powerful at the point of release. There are now 10's of thousands of these covering the skies and I'm curious what this is doing to the molecules in direct contact with them, and the earth's electrical field as a whole. Again, I'm asking these questions, not trying to imply they are all true. On a separate subject, I worry that an extremely important, interesting and pertinent area of science is being suppressed. Dr. Andrew Kaufman is a microbiologist who has presented good evidence that viruses and exosomes are essentially the same process as eachother, and are an extension of our immune systems. It may seem to be incidental point, but if you extrapolate it implies that environmental poison of some kind is a far more likely proposition than a purely person-2-person contagious disease, and that goes for every flu season. The viruses are merely expressions of our cells coping with poisoning, in fact our cells have been proven to successfully use the release of exosomes as defence against bacterial microtoxins (the cells which didnt release exosomes were killed by the bacterial attack). There have been no media outlets or government announcements discussing this theory, and when it is presented it is bundled up with outlandish bullshit theories (lab made etc...). All they have done is pedal institutionalised pseudoscience and basing policies on theories. Dr. Kaufman has presented more evidence than anyone on the traditional germ theory side of the argument, in the "breakdown on current testing procedures" video alone. Shocking that it is not being considered. I though I lived in a free country where people celebrated scientific breakthrough and cordial, open discourse! Anyway, thanks for the video and all the best mate
Fantastic quote, i really find it quite sad that you have to waste your time making a debunking video of something so blatantly ridiculous instead of showing and teaching so much interesting stuff you do and know but well, that's the world we live in
@The Signal Path can you maybe make a video explaining how the phase shifting works in this chips? and how tracking is done? also from the perspective of the cellphone not the tower, does it also do beamforming? and how does the rotations get compensated if that is the case
I've seen people suggesting that this phys.org/news/2008-02-pentagon-lasers-voices.html Is the same thing as the 5g antenna, please can you give me info to help prove them wrong
Privation and fear drive those we haven't educated into the arms of those who, for whatever reason, offer easy answers to challenging problems. In the US at least, perhaps in other countries as well, a strong focus on standardized testing of schoolchildren in recent decades has reduced students' exposure to science as a process and the development of critical thinking skills. My perception as an employer for over thirty years is that those entering the workforce today are better at learning an answer than discovering one. Having learned a wrong answer they lack the skills to test and challenge what they believe to be true. This is, of course, and over-broad generalization. Nevertheless this lack of critical thinking skills leads directly to problems like we see surrounding 5G. Without the skills to change one's mind beliefs become articles of faith. This trend throughout our society has been worrying me profoundly. We may well be headed into dark times. No, I am not giving up. I still do make an effort to correct misinformation and misunderstandings when I am able. This year I had planned to give some science & engineering talks at local schools. I fondly recall a Bell Labs engineer's classroom presentation forty-something years ago that that included the first real laser I had ever seen. We should each do what we can to spread enthusiasm for knowing the truth and the wonderful feeling of truly understanding. This video is a wonderful example of how that can be done.
@@marcusgarvey630 There are billions of wireless devices in the world and millions of cellular towers. If your feelings would be related to RF signals, billions of other people would have similar symptoms. Therefore, it is much more likely that you either have an unrelated medical condition or you are suffering from Nocebo: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocebo
soooo.. and correct me if im wrong.. there is much more risk from radiation exposure as if i will climb a 5g tower in order to set the antenna on fire than simply walking across the street like a normal human being?
Yes, while the effects of exposure to 5G microwaves of that power and that close are not exactly known, you're more likely to die from skin cancer due to the sun.
mcm5 peope, r so stupid these days I swear I mean whats gonna happen? U climbing a 5G is probably more dangerous than actually using 5G people these days i swear theres gonna be such a huge conspiracy soon and unfortunately people think coincidences are not real.
The sun puts out a LOT of EM radiation that keeps us warm. It also puts out UV EM radiation, some if it IONIZING. THAT is what people should worry about more than any of this stuff. Ironic
As being an engineer in electronics I thank for this video and talking about science and scientists. Safe is what society feels to be safe. You’re contributing!
It makes me sad that this video was even necessary, but I'm glad that we as a scientific community have well-spoken, informed representatives like yourself to address these issues.
@@lukahierl9857 I only have one objection to 5G New Radio, but without the the fine granularity UE location information (user equipment) centrally calculated in real-time using the AN location information (access node) it can not function optimaly. For high efficiency use of spectrum and bandwidth, the phased array technology could not reuse the same frequency and bandwidth to simultaneously communicate different information to multiple UE's without high granularity positioning and location information. So my objection is not about the technology, it is about how all totalitarian regimes can easily abuse the technology, but the flip side is that the same technology could easily be used to retroactively track the spread of infectious diseases, with a tiny bit of logging.
@@itsevilbert similarly i think 5G is is a "biologically" sound technology but my concerns are around who will have access to this wonderful band width and how will it be used to exploit the vulnerable and the digitally illiterate. Hight speed online gambling coming to a parking meter near you soon. Unless you can't afford it.
Another wonderful video. Thank you very much! I am a broadcast engineer who studied 5G communications and phased array applications in college, but now I work with AM and FM broadcast. If you would ever like to get a little more info on the old fashioned world of phased array broadcasts on the large scale, hit me up! I would love to talk about the fun world of really high power RF. (A lot of my sites push out over 100,000 watts of RF.)
Yet if you ask them to give up on the phones they are addicted to they will scream blue moider. Can't have one without the other, like saying you want a sports car, but do not want to have roads to drive it on, then complain that your sports car is faulty because it cannot drive on a boulder strewn path.
As an Electrician, you have to be smart and you understand the fundamentals. Don't sell yourself short like 1 wrong move in your job could not kill you.
I have the feeling that the people who burn 5G towers aren't the audience that watches a channel that usually centers around repairing high-frequency measurement devices.
Unfortunately you can't tech these people as they will counter your claim and use some nut youtube video as proof that "insert random radio tech" is dangerous
People who do listen to this channel can learn how to explain things to those who don't. We should all learn to do that, using templates from people such as Shahriar.
The sun puts out a ton of EM radiation across the spectrum, including "5G" millimeter wave frequencies, so people have been exposed to "5G" for the entirety of human evolution, yet they don't know that. I've been wanting to do a video pointing this out (plus other sources like car radar), but am having a hard time finding exact data on irradiance levels at the ground compared to typical 5G tower reception levels. e.g. solar irradiance per sqm vs 5G tower level per sqm. If anyone has such data can you please provide the links. Thanks.
It would not matter given we have used the very same frequencies for decades in other applications at much higher powers than 5G uses. People just do not understands this.
What comes to mind are the parabolic reflectors to make solar furnaces which usually notes 1000W per sqm. Not sure about at each frequency considering resolution throughout the spectrum regarding the electromagnetic spectrum atmospheric window, the data must be somewhere in the non-graphical typical source. Great question. ag.tennessee.edu/solar/Pages/What%20Is%20Solar%20Energy/Sun's%20Energy.aspx
It would indeed be nice to know ground levels. Papers on h2o and o3 absorption would lead me me to guess that atmospheric attenuation would be "significant". What that translates to in terms of power at the earth's surface is another question.
This is the best and most thorough explanation of 5G I have seen so far. For a long time I have wanted to make a similar video in Danish, and have now been further inspired to do so.
Very nice explanation. But the group of people you are trying to address will not listen to your arguments. Those people are very strong believers of the following theories: -The person who invented a car able to run on just water has been killed and his knowledge is bought by a very rich group of people who benefit from cars running on gasoline. -Haarp has been created to "steer" the weather. -Free energy generators do exist but all those who managed to build something like that have been killed and their apparatuses destroyed. -2G, 3G and 4G are dangerous and the research on the subject has been carefully hidden by some big companies. -Zero point energy does exist. Its just a matter of understanding the patent filed by Nicola Tesla. -5G is dangerous in two ways: radiation is one part. The second part is that it contains technology which allows governments to control people. Some say it even contains technology which allows governments to look trough walls of a house. -Marijuana cures all types of cancer but the pharma industry is lobbying everywhere and setting up falsified research projects just to show how bad the substance in question is for their own gains. -Schools teach you things in such manner that you will not be able to see the truth when its presented to you. Physics is all wrong especially what you learn about magnetism is all wrong. On purpose. Otherwise you might be able to build a free energy generator with some magnets and coils. A whole list of theories can be found here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories You mention education. Education alone will not help for this very large group of people. A channel spreading false information about 5G and nonsense about all the above from Belgium has more than a million viewers. That channel and some other channels are probably responsible for the burnt down 5G towers in the Netherlands, the UK and Belgium. People believe the false information presented on those channels because its "information" they can understand. For advancements in technology, the problem is the increasing gap between technology and what people are able to digest which hinders critical thinking.
Here in Paris I love to remind anti-mobile types that the Eiffel Tower they can see from everywhere in the city is putting out around a Megawatt of RF power for TV and FM radio and that maybe they should campaign to close down TV networks. But somehow this seems like a less popular target!! Gotta give people their reality TV!
5g is safe How do I know ? When you put your hand close to a fire, you feel the heat, then, if you put your hand closer, your hand is going to get burns, a fire is a lot of energy ( let's say 400 000 joules ) You are here taking a lot of energy When you use a phone, the electromagnetic waves are so low energy ( let's say 0.0001 joules ) You don't feel anything, do you ? You are here only taking a tiny tiny tiny fraction of energy, which is nothing
Unfortunately, the greed cases can not be fully resolved. Some people just don't trust the regulators and corporations, which sometimes collude to the detriment of the general public. Decades of pedaling toxic lead and tobacco were good historic examples. The recent Boeing / FAA example is another.
It is especially surprising to see how quickly a well organized and scientifically knowledgeable world descends into the middle ages within a few weeks of stress and isolation.
I think the disinformation was timed perfectly. Everyone's eyes are glued to their tech because there is nothing else better to do. Also, this is such an emotional/incindiary topic that this was bound to spread via word-of-mouth.
Hi - where can I get that poster that breaks out spectrum allocations? I'd like to take a closer look, looks pretty interesting. And, how about that solar event!! When was THAT (!!!) ?
All it takes is one boomer believeing it then sending it to everyone theyve ever met. And most of them believe it and send it to their friends. Its a social media thing, my life hasent had questions lacking forethought since i stopped using it.
@@scottiusnevious5143 yep. I have a friend that have a woodwork shop and he is using a simple IQ test on the interview to select his workers. He says for me "is not a problem if they come here don't knowing woodworking, but it is impossible to teach a door"
What is so obvious about RF engineering for people without engineering degrees? The fact that Shariar so clearly explains it doesn't make it obvious. I have to explain my wife why is safe to be in front of the microwave and she still does not believe me = ).
@@sergioe5965 I guess she put a metal object in the microwave once and scared of it ever since then (it gets a bit exciting when you put metal stuff in a microwave)
Thank you for doing this. Now it is our job to take the information you have provided and share it with our families, friends, co-workers and anyone else who will listen. Go to work fellow scientists and engineers. Well, no, don't go to work, Stay at home, but you know what i mean. Sheesh.
Hi Shahriar. First of all, thanks for the video. Very interesting. :) I was curious if you've made (or would be interested in making) a video about theoretical maximum bandwidth? i.e. Using different modulation methods (CW, AM, USB/LSB, FM, Quadrature AM/PSK, pulse [digital], etc.) and the maximum theoretical bandwitch with the associated limitations in terms of noise, EMI, eye diagrams, constellations, filter phase issues, etc. I'd love to see a video about that side of things all in one single video, even just at a basic level, covering the fundamentals of bandwidth and how we've managed to cram much more data into less space in the EM spectrum.
Very interesting to hear that when our connectivity is increased by a factor of 1000, it polarizes us. I think I have heard this before, but where did you get the source? I would love to read it!
Why do I get a headache when I get close to a wifi modem? One of several questions. Im electrohypersensitive to it. And I think it has to do with the carbon nano tubes in the food.
I have one more thing to add here, i know your not a biologist, but i'm quite sure you are aware that the body is electro-chemical. they way safety of mobile devices is determined is by observing the thermal effect of the RF energy, Just the thermal effect, that's all we currently test. This makes no sense to me as i know we are very much also electrical beings! What do you think of this, is measuring heat in a model head full of gel and a robotic arm probe a sufficient way to determine the safety of a device?
I guess you must spend all day and night in a dark room then. Visible light is around 1000 times higher in frequency than the RF waves you seem concerned about.
Hi Shahriar, great video. I have one doubt. It is true that any cellular tower would illuminate very little amount power onto a human at a far distance because of the free space path loss as well as the antenna beamwidth. But radiation from the cell phones, even though the power amount is much smaller than that from the base station, is in the near field of the human head and the exposure time is also much larger. Still, effects or not is subject to observations. But wouldn't there be some thermal effects worth considering? Plus, is effect on the DNA subject to the wavelength being comparable to the DNA dimensions?
The power from the phone is really really small. The mm-wave links are in fact not symmetric because of this (up-link versus down-link). The penetration depth of mm-wave into human tissue is also very shallow. It is a surface dissipation. The power your phone puts out for 4G is more than ten times higher than what it can put out at mm-wave. Not to mention 4G signals penetrate your body much deeper.
@@Thesignalpath Thanks for your reply. I am curious to know the typical peak and average power amounts sent out by a mobile device during make and break of a call in 4G and prescribed for 5G. It would be great if you could give some pointers in this regard. Also, wouldn't the sub-6 GHz 5G be then have somewhat similar effects as that of 4G radiation because the frequencies are not hugely different.
Thank You for taking your valuable time to explain this so people who do not have an understanding of wireless transmission can get an idea of what really is happening.
Just out of curiosity, what is the transmit power of a typical 4G antenna? There is a cell tower on the roof of the apartment building where I live. I study electronic engineering so naturally I took a closer look at the new equipment which was installed when the cell was upgraded to 4G. Each antenna has its own amplifier and they run fairly warm.
Thank for putting this out, Shahriar, I was kinda expecting this! I also liked some of the "overall" details and the chip pictures. Hope no one goes after you!!
Thanks for this, if I wasn't alone in this request to you, I was certainly one of the early folks asking you to address this in your own words. It's sad its even needed and I agree with your assessment that people polarize and can't think critically (or more often even rationally) on social media. Thanks for adding your voice. Give Pooch a pat on the head for me.
Thanks for putting this together! If you're planning to go further down this path, I'd love to see a video that puts in context the RF exposure levels discussed in the National Toxicology Program study that keeps getting tossed around, perhaps by comparing them to measurements of duty cycle / power from an actual cell phone under a couple of common network loads. "Clear evidence of cancerous heart tumors" is getting a lot of attention, while the "High Exposure" qualifier really isn't -- seeing a comparison on an instrument screen might help, especially on a linear scale. I've also seen a few videos from concerned citizens trying to take measurements and draw conclusions using, uhh, inadequate sophistication in metrology. Your hard-won equipment shelf and deep understanding of RF measurements could really contribute to those conversations.
A part of the problem with 5G (3GPP) is that it gets so much marketing by so many folks who try to simplify 5G down to the point where the average person can understand a bit about what it is. The frequency bands where 5G will operate are much wider ranging than just the mm wave bands (and technically 26 and 28 aren't actually mm wavelengths :) ). The majority of area covered by 5G rollout will use lower frequencies below 6 GHz but people are upset over all 5G anyway when in fact many towers will use the same frequencies currently used by 4G LTE. This same dumbing down results in some 5G proponents claiming single digit ms latency for end to end transmissions not just the RLAN, resulting in effect faster than light transmission speeds if someone did the math for those claims - but I digress . . . As you said, satellite has been using mm wave bands for decades. As a satcom engineer working in the field for over 40 years I can attest to that. The power levels transmitted by earth stations towards satellites are generally higher than will be used in the 5G equipment. However, unlike the terrestrial 3, 4, 5G cellular network transmissions, the signals from satellite earth stations are very tightly focused up into space toward the satellites and emit vanishingly small amounts of RF at ground level around the earth stations. Nonetheless the 5G emissions will still be quite low toward the ground too. As part of my job I do radiofrequency exposure hazard analysis calculations and field measurements of RF for satcom earth stations, principally in the 28-30 GHz range but have also done this for the lower 6 GHz and 14 GHz bands used for satellite communications. As part of the licensing process we may computational assessments of what the potential exposure levels around a station might be, and then we also make measurements for some installations that validate the computational results. The standard in the US is very similar to those in various countries around the world and for general population the exposure limit is 1 mW/cm^2 time averaged over a 30 minute period. If the emitted RF levels are higher than that where the general population can freely pass, the equipment can't be licensed and put into service without some form of mitigation to make sure the public is protected. The FCC takes this quite seriously.
@@ericmc6482 I would refer you to the FCC's radio frequency safety page: www.fcc.gov/general/radio-frequency-safety-0 There are links to the FCC policy on human exposure, RF safety FAQ, body tissue dielectric parameters, and more. The potential hazards associated with RF electromagnetic fields are discussed in OET bulletin 56. OET bulletin 65 provides guidelines for evaluating compliance with FCC exposure limits. The limits do vary by frequency. The penetration of RF in the human body varies by radio wavelength. The wave length is ~300 / frequency in MHz. The higher the frequency, the shorter wavelength. As wavelength decreases so does penetration into the body and at mm wave frequencies the heating effect is concentrated more on the skin where there is less blood flow available to carry away and dissipate induced heat. As a result, many country rules include a factor to decrease the averaging time at higher frequencies.
I am proud of not having signed on to Facebook in past 5 years. No account on Tweeter, Instagram and any other unnecessary crap that constantly feeds bullshit to me. If I need to talk to some one, I call them. If I want to learn something I research it online comparing all the info I gather to weed out bullshit.
Through all this you have to remind yourself that biologically we are little different from our ancestors 100000 years ago. We have stone age brains with stone age instincts into which we try to pump an atomic age education. Not to mention cultural issues! This is why the few humans like you who are both erudite and articulate have a duty to inform the masses. Education is the only remedy and I'm a pompous ass.
Great video, and explanation, will send this to curious non technical people ! I love your videos, and am jealous that you got to play with THAT transistor! I would like to bring your attention to minor issue with how you described the operation of phased arrays: the direction of the resulting radio waves is determined only at the antenna, in the near field, by the intentional distortion of the field, before radiowaves are radiated, and not by out of phase radiowaves interfering in free space. It is a key tenant of quantum mechanics that photons, or EM Waves in Maxwell speak, do not interact with each other in free space, unlike wave in a pond. keep up the good work, all your videos are great!- Emerson
I have been captivated by each video you produce. This presentation was most educational and thoroughly enjoyable from start to finish. You tie the whole world together here in a brilliant way.
Awesome, you’re so cool, I wish I was able to watch these videos with my dad, he was a big ham radio guy, he loved talking radio, antennas, fixing and repairing old “boat anchors”.
This video is EXCELLENT. I dont always watvh your videos, some of its over my head but I watch the majority of them. this is by far the best. I can honestly see why you work at Bell. Keep up the good work!
@@Thesignalpath seems to easy as en excuse. You know when you heat a pizza you can take 600watt 20 minutes, and 1200watt 10 minutes. Now if it works like this, what about 10milliwatt for 4 years, for example? Also the danger of 5G is that they can center their beams, individually not dangerous, but together it is. But thank you for your reply 🤗
@@BDYH-ey8kd With 10mW that pizza is staying cold no matter how long you heat it for. Heat dissipation is a thing, remember? So no, it does not work like this. At 600W for 20 min the pizza will be colder at the end of heating than at 1200W for 10 min. There's an extra 10 minutes for heat to leave, while the energy put in is the same.
The only disadvantage i see with 5G is that it now uses 600 MHz band and UHF-TV is now limited to channel 36. The result is that many stations move back to VHF (Band III) TV... ...And nearly all of the outdoor antennas availble on the matket are optimised for UHF-only.
It would be nice if you could go into the details of why semiconductors cannot generate high power levels at high frequencies, in a later video. It sounds like a fascinating topic. Also, IIRC there are some alternative semiconductors for very high frequencies, not only in terms of material (non-silicon) but also in structure. I read somewhere that using a special diode that has a region of negative differential resistance one can make RF oscillator.
The problem is, those who are against 5G usually do neither have a technical, nor medical background. it is impossible to have a useful conversation on that basis. There has been done so much research on this topic, the lack of objectivity is frustrating.
And 13.30 you mention that beam forming is not wasteful energy. According to my understanding from what you said, it seems light signals add constructively and destructively. If that is the case there is a lot of waste in the destructive addition of the signals right? And in reality there is a lot of destructive interference than constructive interference.
Constructive and destructive interference of EM energy means superposition of waves. It doesn’t consume or waste the energy. The energy is consumed when the waves interact with matter.
@@Thesignalpath, beg to differ. You already did transmit lots of RF energy from a series of antennas radiating the energy in all possible directions; *not in a single direction*. At certain points space, due to differences in phase, the waves interfere constructively & destructively. At areas the waves interfere destructively, the energy is wasted. Beamforming using antenna arrays is different to directing EM waves using directional antennae. Beamforming is wasteful. Do you not agree?
That is not correct. Destructive interference does not waste energy. Because for every place the waves destructively add, there is another place they constructively add and double in value. If energy was "wasted" where the waves were destructively added, then energy would have to be "created" where they were added. This of course doesn't happen. Phased arrays offer the benefit of electronic beam steering which dish antennas do not provide. There are other challenges with phased arrays; but this has nothing to do with beam-forming being "wasteful". Phased arrays were invented in 1905. Everything about the physics of this process is well known.
@@Thesignalpath Firstly, thanks for taking time to answer my concern. I must make clear that I am not at all challenging the main purpose of your video. However, my question is tangential. I still find it difficult to agree with your reasoning. Perhaps I was not clear enough in my question. Beamforming is performed using non-directional antennae. So let's now assume a scenario where beam forming is done from a multi antenna base station to a single client. My question is, what about the waves radiated by the base station's antennae not in the direction of the client? What about the energy spent radiating those waves?
I think the source of your confusion is because you think the individual antennas would radiate in all directions. If they were on their own, then you would be right. But they are coupled together in *near field*. This means the collection of the antennas together do NOT radiate in all directions anymore. That is the beauty of phased arrays! The coherent waves in near field interfere and the beam is focused in a specific direction. No energy is wasted (in theory).
the problem is youre preaching on one hand, education and open information then also the opposite with locked down "truths" and no peer review except by your approved "peer". People must have the ability to choose.. if they choose wrong that is being human as well.
You can't "chose" what is true or not. Facts don't care about human choices. This is fundamental mistake that has gained popularity unfortunately. The purpose of peer review is to continue to review and make sure what we think is factual is actually true. Choosing wrong may be a "human" trait, but those humans would be wrong and their opinions is of no value at all.
You gave a lot of great info on your Amp Hour podcast where you talked about the limitations and challenges associated with 5G. Maybe a video highlighting some of that info in this style message would be great. I know of some people that have to defend the installation of 5G towers, but little rational, understandable (to non-engineers) quick info is available out there. A short video for the general public about the safety would be great, where you do exactly as you did here (highlight rationally counter arguments to common claims), but in a shorter form targeted to even more general audience. Great job as always!
Put it this way, there is still people that rather burn witches than getting informed. As such this was just another isotropic message to a deaf receiver I'm afraid.
I came here from electro boom video on 5g
That is great. It was kind of him to mention my work.
Yep, me too ^^
Me too
Yes
Me too
"Memorization is not so important anymore because the information is free and available at all the time, what we need is a faculty of discernment" Well said!
@Roger Baker the society doesnt need thinkers. They need workers. The person who created free education said so himself so. Its no wonder we have tons of idiots today. Memory is unreliable imo and the brain power is better off doing critical thinking than retaining memories. Just a little thought , what do you guys think?
Memorization is important. Its why we must learn from history and ban and outlaw exams, assignments and grading from our education system.
@@hdhsbfhsudjehxhdns3431 Memorization does not interfere with thinking capability. If any, it may increase it because of having more context information in mind and considering it in problem solving. Where it could interfere aswell is time. Don't spend so much time on memorization that you don't have time left to think.
@@Yatukih_001 Charolette Iserbyt
*I worry that, especially as the Millennium edges nearer, pseudoscience and superstition will seem year by year more tempting, the siren song of unreason more sonorous and attractive. Where have we heard it before? Whenever our ethnic or national prejudices are aroused, in times of scarcity, during challenges to national self-esteem or nerve, when we agonize about our diminished cosmic place and purpose, or when fanaticism is bubbling up around us - then, habits of thought familiar from ages past reach for the controls. The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir.*
_- Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark_
Thanks for explaining a bit man, I'm still on the fence regarding the safety. Even though you aren't involved in research on safety, would you put forward ideas if you thought they would be worth investigating? Or ideas on shielding/minimising damage to people/wildlife which are near antennas, and more importantly I guess, wifi boxes? If the signal is 5million times weaker 2 metres away, that means it must be relatively powerful at the point of release. There are now 10's of thousands of these covering the skies and I'm curious what this is doing to the molecules in direct contact with them, and the earth's electrical field as a whole. Again, I'm asking these questions, not trying to imply they are all true.
On a separate subject, I worry that an extremely important, interesting and pertinent area of science is being suppressed. Dr. Andrew Kaufman is a microbiologist who has presented good evidence that viruses and exosomes are essentially the same process as eachother, and are an extension of our immune systems. It may seem to be incidental point, but if you extrapolate it implies that environmental poison of some kind is a far more likely proposition than a purely person-2-person contagious disease, and that goes for every flu season. The viruses are merely expressions of our cells coping with poisoning, in fact our cells have been proven to successfully use the release of exosomes as defence against bacterial microtoxins (the cells which didnt release exosomes were killed by the bacterial attack).
There have been no media outlets or government announcements discussing this theory, and when it is presented it is bundled up with outlandish bullshit theories (lab made etc...). All they have done is pedal institutionalised pseudoscience and basing policies on theories. Dr. Kaufman has presented more evidence than anyone on the traditional germ theory side of the argument, in the "breakdown on current testing procedures" video alone. Shocking that it is not being considered. I though I lived in a free country where people celebrated scientific breakthrough and cordial, open discourse!
Anyway, thanks for the video and all the best mate
Fantastic quote, i really find it quite sad that you have to waste your time making a debunking video of something so blatantly ridiculous instead of showing and teaching so much interesting stuff you do and know
but well, that's the world we live in
@The Signal Path can you maybe make a video explaining how the phase shifting works in this chips? and how tracking is done? also from the perspective of the cellphone not the tower, does it also do beamforming? and how does the rotations get compensated if that is the case
I've seen people suggesting that this
phys.org/news/2008-02-pentagon-lasers-voices.html
Is the same thing as the 5g antenna, please can you give me info to help prove them wrong
Privation and fear drive those we haven't educated into the arms of those who, for whatever reason, offer easy answers to challenging problems. In the US at least, perhaps in other countries as well, a strong focus on standardized testing of schoolchildren in recent decades has reduced students' exposure to science as a process and the development of critical thinking skills. My perception as an employer for over thirty years is that those entering the workforce today are better at learning an answer than discovering one. Having learned a wrong answer they lack the skills to test and challenge what they believe to be true.
This is, of course, and over-broad generalization. Nevertheless this lack of critical thinking skills leads directly to problems like we see surrounding 5G. Without the skills to change one's mind beliefs become articles of faith. This trend throughout our society has been worrying me profoundly. We may well be headed into dark times.
No, I am not giving up. I still do make an effort to correct misinformation and misunderstandings when I am able. This year I had planned to give some science & engineering talks at local schools. I fondly recall a Bell Labs engineer's classroom presentation forty-something years ago that that included the first real laser I had ever seen. We should each do what we can to spread enthusiasm for knowing the truth and the wonderful feeling of truly understanding. This video is a wonderful example of how that can be done.
Short answer: No.
Long Answer: Noooooooooooo.
@@marcusgarvey630 There are billions of wireless devices in the world and millions of cellular towers. If your feelings would be related to RF signals, billions of other people would have similar symptoms. Therefore, it is much more likely that you either have an unrelated medical condition or you are suffering from Nocebo: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocebo
soooo.. and correct me if im wrong.. there is much more risk from radiation exposure as if i will climb a 5g tower in order to set the antenna on fire than simply walking across the street like a normal human being?
Yes, while the effects of exposure to 5G microwaves of that power and that close are not exactly known, you're more likely to die from skin cancer due to the sun.
The towers being burned are cell towers, not 5G. Ask all the birds nesting in those towers if it is dangerous.
ForbiddTV 5G cell towers
mcm5 peope, r so stupid these days I swear
I mean whats gonna happen? U climbing a 5G is probably more dangerous than actually using 5G people these days i swear theres gonna be such a huge conspiracy soon and unfortunately people think coincidences are not real.
Awesome work, well done!
The sun puts out a LOT of EM radiation that keeps us warm. It also puts out UV EM radiation, some if it IONIZING. THAT is what people should worry about more than any of this stuff. Ironic
As being an engineer in electronics I thank for this video and talking about science and scientists. Safe is what society feels to be safe. You’re contributing!
This video must be shown at schools!
It makes me sad that this video was even necessary, but I'm glad that we as a scientific community have well-spoken, informed representatives like yourself to address these issues.
I wonder how long it is going to take and all the anti-5G nuttjobs start showing up and this comment section ends up like the one on BigClives video
@@lukahierl9857 I only have one objection to 5G New Radio, but without the the fine granularity UE location information (user equipment) centrally calculated in real-time using the AN location information (access node) it can not function optimaly. For high efficiency use of spectrum and bandwidth, the phased array technology could not reuse the same frequency and bandwidth to simultaneously communicate different information to multiple UE's without high granularity positioning and location information. So my objection is not about the technology, it is about how all totalitarian regimes can easily abuse the technology, but the flip side is that the same technology could easily be used to retroactively track the spread of infectious diseases, with a tiny bit of logging.
There are an extreme abundance of total idiots out there so I'm unfortunately not surprised at all.
@@itsevilbert similarly i think 5G is is a "biologically" sound technology but my concerns are around who will have access to this wonderful band width and how will it be used to exploit the vulnerable and the digitally illiterate.
Hight speed online gambling coming to a parking meter near you soon. Unless you can't afford it.
Luka Hierl didn’t take to long for it to happen
Disappointed. I was expecting a large Klystron transmitter build to communicate with a planet that Kim Basinger lives on :(
Attacks on any telecom engineer has been happening in the UK
Another wonderful video. Thank you very much! I am a broadcast engineer who studied 5G communications and phased array applications in college, but now I work with AM and FM broadcast. If you would ever like to get a little more info on the old fashioned world of phased array broadcasts on the large scale, hit me up! I would love to talk about the fun world of really high power RF. (A lot of my sites push out over 100,000 watts of RF.)
I understand 5G and I’m only an electrician, the madness of all the people crying about it who have no clue how it even works does my head in
@Jedi Master This 'happened' in The Hague. However, it wasn't due to 5G.
@Jedi Master Solar has... Look up "Bird Streamers" :)
Yet if you ask them to give up on the phones they are addicted to they will scream blue moider. Can't have one without the other, like saying you want a sports car, but do not want to have roads to drive it on, then complain that your sports car is faulty because it cannot drive on a boulder strewn path.
And yet that has nothing to do with 5G
As an Electrician, you have to be smart and you understand the fundamentals. Don't sell yourself short like 1 wrong move in your job could not kill you.
I have the feeling that the people who burn 5G towers aren't the audience that watches a channel that usually centers around repairing high-frequency measurement devices.
As someone to isn't specifically into RF, I can use this as a resource to educate other people
Finished the video knew most of it lol nvm
Thanks to Facebook, they will, whether they want to or not.
Unfortunately you can't tech these people as they will counter your claim and use some nut youtube video as proof that "insert random radio tech" is dangerous
People who do listen to this channel can learn how to explain things to those who don't. We should all learn to do that, using templates from people such as Shahriar.
The sun puts out a ton of EM radiation across the spectrum, including "5G" millimeter wave frequencies, so people have been exposed to "5G" for the entirety of human evolution, yet they don't know that. I've been wanting to do a video pointing this out (plus other sources like car radar), but am having a hard time finding exact data on irradiance levels at the ground compared to typical 5G tower reception levels. e.g. solar irradiance per sqm vs 5G tower level per sqm.
If anyone has such data can you please provide the links. Thanks.
It would not matter given we have used the very same frequencies for decades in other applications at much higher powers than 5G uses.
People just do not understands this.
What comes to mind are the parabolic reflectors to make solar furnaces which usually notes 1000W per sqm. Not sure about at each frequency considering resolution throughout the spectrum regarding the electromagnetic spectrum atmospheric window, the data must be somewhere in the non-graphical typical source. Great question. ag.tennessee.edu/solar/Pages/What%20Is%20Solar%20Energy/Sun's%20Energy.aspx
This is 17GHz: solar.nro.nao.ac.jp/norp/html/Monthly-Smoothed/17GHz.png
measured in Solar Flux Unit = 10−22 W⋅m−2⋅Hz−1....therefore 600SFU at 17GHz is 1.02E-7
W⋅m−2 if my calculations are correct
It would indeed be nice to know ground levels. Papers on h2o and o3 absorption would lead me me to guess that atmospheric attenuation would be "significant". What that translates to in terms of power at the earth's surface is another question.
All Iranians are proud of you bro. همه ما ایرانی ها به شما افتخار میکنیم.
This is the best and most thorough explanation of 5G I have seen so far. For a long time I have wanted to make a similar video in Danish, and have now been further inspired to do so.
Very nice explanation. But the group of people you are trying to address will not listen to your arguments. Those people are very strong believers of the following theories:
-The person who invented a car able to run on just water has been killed and his knowledge is bought by a very rich group of people who benefit from cars running on gasoline.
-Haarp has been created to "steer" the weather.
-Free energy generators do exist but all those who managed to build something like that have been killed and their apparatuses destroyed.
-2G, 3G and 4G are dangerous and the research on the subject has been carefully hidden by some big companies.
-Zero point energy does exist. Its just a matter of understanding the patent filed by Nicola Tesla.
-5G is dangerous in two ways: radiation is one part. The second part is that it contains technology which allows governments to control people. Some say it even contains technology which allows governments to look trough walls of a house.
-Marijuana cures all types of cancer but the pharma industry is lobbying everywhere and setting up falsified research projects just to show how bad the substance in question is for their own gains.
-Schools teach you things in such manner that you will not be able to see the truth when its presented to you. Physics is all wrong especially what you learn about magnetism is all wrong. On purpose. Otherwise you might be able to build a free energy generator with some magnets and coils.
A whole list of theories can be found here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories
You mention education. Education alone will not help for this very large group of people. A channel spreading false information about 5G and nonsense about all the above from Belgium has more than a million viewers. That channel and some other channels are probably responsible for the burnt down 5G towers in the Netherlands, the UK and Belgium. People believe the false information presented on those channels because its "information" they can understand. For advancements in technology, the problem is the increasing gap between technology and what people are able to digest which hinders critical thinking.
Here in Paris I love to remind anti-mobile types that the Eiffel Tower they can see from everywhere in the city is putting out around a Megawatt of RF power for TV and FM radio and that maybe they should campaign to close down TV networks. But somehow this seems like a less popular target!! Gotta give people their reality TV!
Surely not a Megawatt.
@@risfutile Well some of the TV channels is actually transmitting at half a MW: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiffel_Tower
@@risfutile Looks like 1.8MW according to wiki.
5g is safe
How do I know ?
When you put your hand close to a fire, you feel the heat, then, if you put your hand closer, your hand is going to get burns, a fire is a lot of energy ( let's say 400 000 joules )
You are here taking a lot of energy
When you use a phone, the electromagnetic waves are so low energy ( let's say 0.0001 joules )
You don't feel anything, do you ?
You are here only taking a tiny tiny tiny fraction of energy, which is nothing
Thanks for the great video!
The picture of you holding the first transistor, was a huge nerd flex, though... :D
Unfortunately, the greed cases can not be fully resolved. Some people just don't trust the regulators and corporations, which sometimes collude to the detriment of the general public. Decades of pedaling toxic lead and tobacco were good historic examples. The recent Boeing / FAA example is another.
It is especially surprising to see how quickly a well organized and scientifically knowledgeable world descends into the middle ages within a few weeks of stress and isolation.
I think the disinformation was timed perfectly. Everyone's eyes are glued to their tech because there is nothing else better to do. Also, this is such an emotional/incindiary topic that this was bound to spread via word-of-mouth.
Hi - where can I get that poster that breaks out spectrum allocations? I'd like to take a closer look, looks pretty interesting. And, how about that solar event!! When was THAT (!!!) ?
Google: "US frequency allocation chart"
I don't like looking at selfies, but a selfy with the first point-contact transistor in the frame? Hell yeah!
On a more lighthearted note, I love Pooch in your new logo!
Well done! But it's a shame that we need to explain so obvious questions 🤦♀️
They still won't learn either. They are purposely ignorant.
All it takes is one boomer believeing it then sending it to everyone theyve ever met. And most of them believe it and send it to their friends. Its a social media thing, my life hasent had questions lacking forethought since i stopped using it.
@@scottiusnevious5143 yep. I have a friend that have a woodwork shop and he is using a simple IQ test on the interview to select his workers. He says for me "is not a problem if they come here don't knowing woodworking, but it is impossible to teach a door"
What is so obvious about RF engineering for people without engineering degrees? The fact that Shariar so clearly explains it doesn't make it obvious. I have to explain my wife why is safe to be in front of the microwave and she still does not believe me = ).
@@sergioe5965 I guess she put a metal object in the microwave once and scared of it ever since then (it gets a bit exciting when you put metal stuff in a microwave)
This video is absolutely stellar.
Thank you for doing this. Now it is our job to take the information you have provided and share it with our families, friends, co-workers and anyone else who will listen. Go to work fellow scientists and engineers. Well, no, don't go to work, Stay at home, but you know what i mean. Sheesh.
Hi Shahriar. First of all, thanks for the video. Very interesting. :)
I was curious if you've made (or would be interested in making) a video about theoretical maximum bandwidth? i.e. Using different modulation methods (CW, AM, USB/LSB, FM, Quadrature AM/PSK, pulse [digital], etc.) and the maximum theoretical bandwitch with the associated limitations in terms of noise, EMI, eye diagrams, constellations, filter phase issues, etc.
I'd love to see a video about that side of things all in one single video, even just at a basic level, covering the fundamentals of bandwidth and how we've managed to cram much more data into less space in the EM spectrum.
Very interesting to hear that when our connectivity is increased by a factor of 1000, it polarizes us. I think I have heard this before, but where did you get the source? I would love to read it!
Why do I get a headache when I get close to a wifi modem? One of several questions. Im electrohypersensitive to it. And I think it has to do with the carbon nano tubes in the food.
Excellent. Thank you very much.
Thanks for being a voice if reason!
I have one more thing to add here, i know your not a biologist, but i'm quite sure you are aware that the body is electro-chemical. they way safety of mobile devices is determined is by observing the thermal effect of the RF energy, Just the thermal effect, that's all we currently test. This makes no sense to me as i know we are very much also electrical beings! What do you think of this, is measuring heat in a model head full of gel and a robotic arm probe a sufficient way to determine the safety of a device?
I guess you must spend all day and night in a dark room then. Visible light is around 1000 times higher in frequency than the RF waves you seem concerned about.
This video wins you my subscription. Thank you.
Hi Shahriar, great video. I have one doubt. It is true that any cellular tower would illuminate very little amount power onto a human at a far distance because of the free space path loss as well as the antenna beamwidth. But radiation from the cell phones, even though the power amount is much smaller than that from the base station, is in the near field of the human head and the exposure time is also much larger. Still, effects or not is subject to observations. But wouldn't there be some thermal effects worth considering? Plus, is effect on the DNA subject to the wavelength being comparable to the DNA dimensions?
The power from the phone is really really small. The mm-wave links are in fact not symmetric because of this (up-link versus down-link). The penetration depth of mm-wave into human tissue is also very shallow. It is a surface dissipation. The power your phone puts out for 4G is more than ten times higher than what it can put out at mm-wave. Not to mention 4G signals penetrate your body much deeper.
@@Thesignalpath Thanks for your reply. I am curious to know the typical peak and average power amounts sent out by a mobile device during make and break of a call in 4G and prescribed for 5G. It would be great if you could give some pointers in this regard. Also, wouldn't the sub-6 GHz 5G be then have somewhat similar effects as that of 4G radiation because the frequencies are not hugely different.
Thank you for your time and effort. Very well thought out and organized. It would be nice to get a written transcript.
Thank you. This was not transcribed, it was unscripted and somewhat off the cuff.
Would it be possible to do a beam forming demo? not sure how the waves could be visualised. We need some sort of camera that could view RF energy.
A voice of sound thought and reason! Nice to see your alive and well youngman
This is the real information. It's the information that a few people are looking for.
This video is very well done, thank you! I will share this a ton!
Thank You for taking your valuable time to explain this so people who do not have an understanding of wireless transmission can get an idea of what really is happening.
Hi Shahriar... excellent video and amazing presentation...
Just out of curiosity, what is the transmit power of a typical 4G antenna? There is a cell tower on the roof of the apartment building where I live. I study electronic engineering so naturally I took a closer look at the new equipment which was installed when the cell was upgraded to 4G. Each antenna has its own amplifier and they run fairly warm.
I hope you do more videos like this
Hello! Nice video.
So is it possible to precisely track your phone location by a few 5G phase array antennas?
Can you please give us the links of your illustrations ?
Wonderful explanations. Keep up the great work.
Thank for putting this out, Shahriar, I was kinda expecting this! I also liked some of the "overall" details and the chip pictures. Hope no one goes after you!!
Where did you get the "Internet Era" Chart? the source is covered up
5:33, Could you tell the source of the Picture? Thank you!
@@OrbiterElectronics For a proper vector version www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/january_2016_spectrum_wall_chart.pdf
Awesome presentation
Thank you for this very important message in order to inform and enlighten people as to what the technology really is, Shahriar.
So, nice video. How much Energy does the receiver(phone...) puts out when replying to the 5G antennas?
Mobile phones are capped at around 2 watts when transmitting I think.
@@Apollo-p1l That is for sub-5GHz. At mm-Wave it is much lower.
Well even at 2 watts, its hardly scary.
Thanks for this, if I wasn't alone in this request to you, I was certainly one of the early folks asking you to address this in your own words. It's sad its even needed and I agree with your assessment that people polarize and can't think critically (or more often even rationally) on social media. Thanks for adding your voice. Give Pooch a pat on the head for me.
Excellent. What about an extensive intro to 5G per se?!?
17:37 loved this section about the scientific process. Thank you Shariar! This video is still relevant today, more than 2 years later.
Thanks for putting this together! If you're planning to go further down this path, I'd love to see a video that puts in context the RF exposure levels discussed in the National Toxicology Program study that keeps getting tossed around, perhaps by comparing them to measurements of duty cycle / power from an actual cell phone under a couple of common network loads. "Clear evidence of cancerous heart tumors" is getting a lot of attention, while the "High Exposure" qualifier really isn't -- seeing a comparison on an instrument screen might help, especially on a linear scale. I've also seen a few videos from concerned citizens trying to take measurements and draw conclusions using, uhh, inadequate sophistication in metrology. Your hard-won equipment shelf and deep understanding of RF measurements could really contribute to those conversations.
Recommended?
A part of the problem with 5G (3GPP) is that it gets so much marketing by so many folks who try to simplify 5G down to the point where the average person can understand a bit about what it is. The frequency bands where 5G will operate are much wider ranging than just the mm wave bands (and technically 26 and 28 aren't actually mm wavelengths :) ). The majority of area covered by 5G rollout will use lower frequencies below 6 GHz but people are upset over all 5G anyway when in fact many towers will use the same frequencies currently used by 4G LTE. This same dumbing down results in some 5G proponents claiming single digit ms latency for end to end transmissions not just the RLAN, resulting in effect faster than light transmission speeds if someone did the math for those claims - but I digress . . .
As you said, satellite has been using mm wave bands for decades. As a satcom engineer working in the field for over 40 years I can attest to that. The power levels transmitted by earth stations towards satellites are generally higher than will be used in the 5G equipment. However, unlike the terrestrial 3, 4, 5G cellular network transmissions, the signals from satellite earth stations are very tightly focused up into space toward the satellites and emit vanishingly small amounts of RF at ground level around the earth stations. Nonetheless the 5G emissions will still be quite low toward the ground too.
As part of my job I do radiofrequency exposure hazard analysis calculations and field measurements of RF for satcom earth stations, principally in the 28-30 GHz range but have also done this for the lower 6 GHz and 14 GHz bands used for satellite communications. As part of the licensing process we may computational assessments of what the potential exposure levels around a station might be, and then we also make measurements for some installations that validate the computational results.
The standard in the US is very similar to those in various countries around the world and for general population the exposure limit is 1 mW/cm^2 time averaged over a 30 minute period. If the emitted RF levels are higher than that where the general population can freely pass, the equipment can't be licensed and put into service without some form of mitigation to make sure the public is protected. The FCC takes this quite seriously.
"the exposure limit is 1 mW/cm^2 time averaged over a 30 minute period"....so how are these limits derived and what is the variance wrt frequency ?.
@@ericmc6482 I would refer you to the FCC's radio frequency safety page: www.fcc.gov/general/radio-frequency-safety-0
There are links to the FCC policy on human exposure, RF safety FAQ, body tissue dielectric parameters, and more.
The potential hazards associated with RF electromagnetic fields are discussed in OET bulletin 56. OET bulletin 65 provides guidelines for evaluating compliance with FCC exposure limits.
The limits do vary by frequency. The penetration of RF in the human body varies by radio wavelength. The wave length is ~300 / frequency in MHz. The higher the frequency, the shorter wavelength. As wavelength decreases so does penetration into the body and at mm wave frequencies the heating effect is concentrated more on the skin where there is less blood flow available to carry away and dissipate induced heat. As a result, many country rules include a factor to decrease the averaging time at higher frequencies.
Thanks you so much for putting out this video. Very well done as usual.
Why is there a shipping container just floating down the road at @16:52 😳
Haha! You are right!
Just like when Trump said covid-19 is a mere flu 👎🏾.... now what’s happening . Food for thought
Well explained, and so many good points are made. Science is a journey ....
I am proud of not having signed on to Facebook in past 5 years. No account on Tweeter, Instagram and any other unnecessary crap that constantly feeds bullshit to me. If I need to talk to some one, I call them. If I want to learn something I research it online comparing all the info I gather to weed out bullshit.
Through all this you have to remind yourself that biologically we are little different from our ancestors 100000 years ago. We have stone age brains with stone age instincts into which we try to pump an atomic age education. Not to mention cultural issues! This is why the few humans like you who are both erudite and articulate have a duty to inform the masses. Education is the only remedy and I'm a pompous ass.
Great educational explanation
Great video, and explanation, will send this to curious non technical people !
I love your videos, and am jealous that you got to play with THAT transistor! I would like to bring your attention to minor issue with how you described the operation of phased arrays: the direction of the resulting radio waves is determined only at the antenna, in the near field, by the intentional distortion of the field, before radiowaves are radiated, and not by out of phase radiowaves interfering in free space. It is a key tenant of quantum mechanics that photons, or EM Waves in Maxwell speak, do not interact with each other in free space, unlike wave in a pond. keep up the good work, all your videos are great!- Emerson
Great presentation👍, and especially the eye catching slides😊
Than you for such balance explanation of the subject.
great video, really well explained. I hope it helps to spread the right info about the subject
I have been captivated by each video you produce. This presentation was most educational and thoroughly enjoyable from start to finish. You tie the whole world together here in a brilliant way.
Awesome, you’re so cool, I wish I was able to watch these videos with my dad, he was a big ham radio guy, he loved talking radio, antennas, fixing and repairing old “boat anchors”.
AESA and PESA are common in radar. Have had it for years. Firat phased array radars came about during ww2.
This is so awesome & educational! I really appreciate your posting this.
This video is EXCELLENT. I dont always watvh your videos, some of its over my head but I watch the majority of them. this is by far the best. I can honestly see why you work at Bell. Keep up the good work!
Then why is Wi-Fi 2.4G and microwave ovens also?
Because that was the ISM band which was available for products. (www.howtogeek.com/401215/why-does-wi-fi-use-the-same-frequency-as-microwaves/)
@@Thesignalpath
seems to easy as en excuse. You know when you heat a pizza you can take 600watt 20 minutes, and 1200watt 10 minutes. Now if it works like this, what about 10milliwatt for 4 years, for example?
Also the danger of 5G is that they can center their beams, individually not dangerous, but together it is.
But thank you for your reply 🤗
@@BDYH-ey8kd With 10mW that pizza is staying cold no matter how long you heat it for. Heat dissipation is a thing, remember? So no, it does not work like this. At 600W for 20 min the pizza will be colder at the end of heating than at 1200W for 10 min. There's an extra 10 minutes for heat to leave, while the energy put in is the same.
The only disadvantage i see with 5G is that it now uses 600 MHz band and UHF-TV is now limited to channel 36.
The result is that many stations move back to VHF (Band III) TV...
...And nearly all of the outdoor antennas availble on the matket are optimised for UHF-only.
Well done.
It would be nice if you could go into the details of why semiconductors cannot generate high power levels at high frequencies, in a later video. It sounds like a fascinating topic. Also, IIRC there are some alternative semiconductors for very high frequencies, not only in terms of material (non-silicon) but also in structure. I read somewhere that using a special diode that has a region of negative differential resistance one can make RF oscillator.
The problem is, those who are against 5G usually do neither have a technical, nor medical background. it is impossible to have a useful conversation on that basis. There has been done so much research on this topic, the lack of objectivity is frustrating.
Nice!
Hi Shahriar !
Could you please enable "Community contribution" feature for this video?
I would like to translate it into my language.
I did not even know about this. I’ll check it out.
“There was no immunity to cuckoo ideas on Earth.”
― Kurt Vonnegut, Breakfast of Champions
There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and the human capacity for stupidity.
Great explanation!
And 13.30 you mention that beam forming is not wasteful energy. According to my understanding from what you said, it seems light signals add constructively and destructively. If that is the case there is a lot of waste in the destructive addition of the signals right? And in reality there is a lot of destructive interference than constructive interference.
Constructive and destructive interference of EM energy means superposition of waves. It doesn’t consume or waste the energy. The energy is consumed when the waves interact with matter.
@@Thesignalpath, beg to differ. You already did transmit lots of RF energy from a series of antennas radiating the energy in all possible directions; *not in a single direction*. At certain points space, due to differences in phase, the waves interfere constructively & destructively. At areas the waves interfere destructively, the energy is wasted. Beamforming using antenna arrays is different to directing EM waves using directional antennae. Beamforming is wasteful. Do you not agree?
That is not correct. Destructive interference does not waste energy. Because for every place the waves destructively add, there is another place they constructively add and double in value. If energy was "wasted" where the waves were destructively added, then energy would have to be "created" where they were added. This of course doesn't happen.
Phased arrays offer the benefit of electronic beam steering which dish antennas do not provide. There are other challenges with phased arrays; but this has nothing to do with beam-forming being "wasteful". Phased arrays were invented in 1905. Everything about the physics of this process is well known.
@@Thesignalpath Firstly, thanks for taking time to answer my concern. I must make clear that I am not at all challenging the main purpose of your video. However, my question is tangential. I still find it difficult to agree with your reasoning. Perhaps I was not clear enough in my question.
Beamforming is performed using non-directional antennae. So let's now assume a scenario where beam forming is done from a multi antenna base station to a single client. My question is, what about the waves radiated by the base station's antennae not in the direction of the client? What about the energy spent radiating those waves?
I think the source of your confusion is because you think the individual antennas would radiate in all directions. If they were on their own, then you would be right. But they are coupled together in *near field*. This means the collection of the antennas together do NOT radiate in all directions anymore. That is the beauty of phased arrays! The coherent waves in near field interfere and the beam is focused in a specific direction. No energy is wasted (in theory).
Thanks for making this video. I will share it with all of my friends and also point people to it when they raise questions about 5G.
This was a joy to watch. Thank you.
Excellent, thanks very much for doing this, I now have more understanding of 5G.
the problem is youre preaching on one hand, education and open information then also the opposite with locked down "truths" and no peer review except by your approved "peer". People must have the ability to choose.. if they choose wrong that is being human as well.
You can't "chose" what is true or not. Facts don't care about human choices. This is fundamental mistake that has gained popularity unfortunately. The purpose of peer review is to continue to review and make sure what we think is factual is actually true. Choosing wrong may be a "human" trait, but those humans would be wrong and their opinions is of no value at all.
This is your brain 🥚.
This is your brain on 5G 🐣.
Any questions?
Really well presented, thank you!!
You gave a lot of great info on your Amp Hour podcast where you talked about the limitations and challenges associated with 5G. Maybe a video highlighting some of that info in this style message would be great. I know of some people that have to defend the installation of 5G towers, but little rational, understandable (to non-engineers) quick info is available out there. A short video for the general public about the safety would be great, where you do exactly as you did here (highlight rationally counter arguments to common claims), but in a shorter form targeted to even more general audience. Great job as always!
Fantastic video, so well explained Shahriar 👏
Put it this way, there is still people that rather burn witches than getting informed. As such this was just another isotropic message to a deaf receiver I'm afraid.
Amazing video bro
This was an excellent video. Thank you.
Wouldn't beam steering push you off the edge of the earth if you were close to the edge ? Great video, tnx 4 upload!
This provides great insight and should go along way in demystifying 5G conspiracy theories
Wasn't Tesla who did the first wireless signaling?