You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: THRILLING COMBINATION: Artificial Intelligence and 5G TECHNOLOGY
Hi @ulqu3
The problem I see is the fact that 5g antennas need to be placed very near to each other (like 300m away) which means that we will be surely more exposed to effects of this tech. Whatever effects would it be.
What I know that 5G should be regulated somehow. Right now there is almost no regulations and zero health research has been publicly provided. And that doesnt sound reassuring.
Thx for your comment buddy,
Yours, Piotr
"...surely more exposed..."
What seems obvious often overlooks nuance.
The inverse square law, which describes how the intensity of long distance effects reduces with distance from their source (such as how a noise sounds quieter the father away you are), can be used to show that with a bunch of nearby antennas vs one far away antenna people in the operational area could be exposed to less radiation.
Also, I think many people are too spooked to hear the word 'radiation' in relation to electromagnetic waves. There's a big difference between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation in terms of how they interact with biological systems. Non-ionizing radiation, like that used in these technologies, is quite significantly less dangerous to biological systems. Visible light is non-ionizing radiation. So is the life giving infrared light from a campfire, that keeps an otherwise frozen person alive.
I'm tempted to make my own post about multiple antennas, radiation exposure, and tangentially 5G, where I show the math I'm talking about for the inverse square law.
That might do better as a comment to this post though, or maybe just be too nerdy for anyone to care.
I like the robust discussion here! Thanks @crypto.piotr.
Dear @a-non-e-moose
I really enjoyed that too :)
Cheers buddy, Piotr