It has already started as you mentioned, as long as there will be financial benefits, strongly driven by markets, then it'll emerge quickly, never mind about any consequences, has any serious solution for the green house effect applied effectively ? though environmental disasters are taking place increasingly !

Dear Dr. Yasser Jaamour,

Thank you for your response. Though I appreciate the technology as an engineer in the field, the coming frightens me. Don't you think we are going too far on this 5G thing, touching the untouchable. After all what is the use of advancement in technology if it is going to destroy humanity and favor cyborgs?

I wouldn't be quite so negative, Samuel. Using your same logic, in order for mankind to be safe, we'd still be tilling the land with horse-drawn plows. But we know that in fact, if we were to farm that way, many more people would go hungry. If one is too pessimistic about the future direction of technology, then just look backwards a bit, and see whether it was all bad, or even mostly bad.

Also, 4G is theoretically capable of 1 Gb/s per cell transceiver (optimally), and 5G is supposed to be good for at least 10 times that (optimally). Where by optimally, I mean at short range to the tower. In fact, ever since 2G GSM, the available channel capacity has been a function of the mobile device's distance from the tower. There is no one guaranteed bit rate, as there was originally in 2G.

But I agree with the message of your graphic. The only way 5G can meet its promises is with very much more frequency reuse. Which means, very small cells. So indeed, that little transceiver, on the light pole, right outside your window, is going to be commonplace. Regulations on maximum permissible signal density exposure (W/m2) have to be enforced. Absolutely.

I like such alerting persons who are worry about our environment in which we live. For sure, there are reversible and irreversible reactions and reversible reactions may turn to irreversible reactions when large deviation from equilibrium is forced.

Mankind is always in a harry because their lifetime is short.

If the people crossed some red lines in their massive activities in the environment and forced great changes in a short time, the environment has its regeneration mechanisms to normalize itself but this may be very expensive, dangerous and destroying.

So, i am with you that i am for wise and controlled advancements that is environment aware. I am against to overdrive the things.

As for the communication and electronic technology advancement till now it is overall for the benefit of humans. If such technologies are applied for save and preserve the resources and use them efficiently it will bring usefulness for the mankind.

My observation is that no one will be able to stop this spontaneously growing advancements except the laws of nature.

Best wishes

Meanwhile as new technology invented role communication becomes stronger n stronger

I am also of the same opinion as of Samuel, But, if 5G network is operating in mm wave and at microwave frequencies, will it not be really harmful to human beings?

I red few articles , which says people living near to base stations get diseases like cancer..

Is it really proved?Who takes care of these rules and regulations?How much base station radiated power is safe for people, who stay nearby?

Can anyone please clear my question?

@ Asha Ganganna Hagargund : As far as i know its the ICNRP ( the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection ) which decides and undertakes tests regarding the harmful effects of such waves on cells . However several test have proved there is no significant affect of these waves causing cancer or any type of mutation in human cells but there are effects in several other aspects . Here is a paper on thorough study of the same

Asha, I think that Achint gave you the short and sweet answer: 5G uses parts of the electromagnetic spectrum in which radiation is non-ionizing. Which briefly means, if you think in terms of the particle model of EM radiation, the photons do not carry enough energy to displace electrons, in the atoms they strike. So, in these frequencies, EM radiation can heat tissue, but not change its molecular structure.

Even much higher frequencies than microwave, are non-ionizing. For example, the entire visible spectrum of light, and even ultraviolet, is still non-ionizing. It's not until you go higher frequency than UV, beginning with X-rays, that the bigger danger exists.

But that's not to say that all is well, with exposure to non-ionizing radiation. After all, if you get too much exposure to the sun, you will get a sunburn, as your skin is overheated by UV. And this can eventually cause permanent damage too. So that's why it's imperative to monitor signal strength where people might be exposed, and be sure to be within safe margins.

Good question Asha Ganganna Hagargund ! You see, there are rules and regulations, standards so on, but do you really think the rule by itself protect us unless someone cares and implement them? When it comes to new technology, no body cares about human life as far as I understand. Scientists are playing God, experimenting hybridizing human with other species, creating superhuman in the lab, reviving the extinct dangerous beasts like dinosaurs etc...what does that mean to us, normal God-created human being? I love science and technology, but there must be a limit to what we do. Save the planet is a good thing but destroying humanity on the way is not really "saving".

Dear Albert Manfredi , Abdelhalim abdelnaby Zekry , Abdelhalim abdelnaby Zekry , Asha Ganganna Hagargund , Achint Duggal

Thank you for contributing and sharing your point of view. I still would like to remind you the danger this high frequency focused signal could cause otherwise I know the technological advantage we will have, it changes everything...but I wish it were without disturbing nature. Please read more the available literature and public views with a clear mind and see for yourself if the danger I am mentioning really exist before we start to face the reality in the very near future. I hope as a researcher, we should be curious and open up ourselves to any possible reality, search for it and if that is the truth, we should defend the truth.

Along with technology we need to focus as well on save environment save world, save nature........

We are currently living in exciting times and with the advent of 5G this is going to more and more excitement.. We need to properly temper it with new technologies such as AI for the ultimate benefit of the man kind and not to simply leave to the market forces. Regulators and Govt should play an active role to see that these are used for the increasing GDP and overall index of gross happy ness. Since this is a Non Ionizing Radiation I don"t think it shall cause any problems. Countries like India have taken a safer approach limiting the radiation limits to one tenth of the WHO limits. Neverthless Research Should continue. We need to synchronise and arrive at Gross environment Index so as to properly balance development with Social objectives.

Hello Samuel Lakew

I rally liked your description of the expected disastrous effects of 5G, and I asked Dr. Ted Rappaport (one of pioneering professors from the NYU in the field of mmWave and 5G) about the health effects resulted from using such frequencies and he mentioned that he did this research on that topic before beginning his experiments on the mmWave channel measurements few years ago:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.05944.pdf

It is obvious that using these frequencies (i.e. mmWaves) is far from ionization that causes health issues for humans if they are used in the right way and according to federal regulations.

Best Regards.

Thank you Mustafa, good to know people care. I am still not sure they are being used in the right way "according to the federal regulations". How much should we trust the Federal Regulation's strict implementation of their regulation in this case? Did they say anything, explain something to the general population when people complain a lot for the 5G towers built overnight in their neighborhood? Why are they forcing the local administrations to just accept and install the towers without questions? What are they hiding from the general population? This and a similar question must be answered, don't you think?

Samuel, we cannot ignore that just about any innovation is met with emotional resistance. For example, some people worried about all the satellite dishes going up, when direct-broadcast satellite was first introduced.

And yet, obviously, those are just receiving antennas. They don't transmit anything. But that did not stop people from fretting.

I'll grant you that in the case of 5G, we are talking about small and ubiquitous transmitters. True. So now, we have to rely on measurements and safety guidelines, based on a long history of such guidelines, and measurements on human tissue exposure. We have lived with RF radiation for very many years now, so this is more of the same. It's important to not exceed exposure limits.

Did they say anything, explain something to the general population when people complain a lot for the 5G towers built overnight in their neighborhood?

Are these the same people who are happily using 2G/3G/4G, cordless phones, microwave ovens, baby monitors, and WiFi? I'd say, most of them are indeed the same people. So, what is their new concern? Esthetics?

We have more and more people using more and more data, on these mobile devices and at home. People are not satisfied with just voice calls anymore. People claim they need faster broadband, and they need it no matter where they live. So, 5G is today's answer, to some of these needs. If people were happy with less broadband service, that would be a different matter.

Dear Albert,

Thank you for the comment. I understand the trend and people's perception towards new technology; for instance people perceived the first telephone in Ethiopia as demon's work. But at this era we know better, we have seen unimaginable things has happened. Technology is application of the science (physics in this case). I have great appreciation to quantum physics theory than 5G technology. My fear and reason's are many, the first being the frequency level is too high (high energy or radiation is contained) and focused which literally means 'people living in a microwave oven'. 4G, 3G etc frequencies were in acceptable lower range but this time the technology is different. Scientists are excited about many auxiliary related technology which will work perfectly well with 5G like internet of things, smart grid, AI and industry 4.0. I know there will be many exiting things we see during 5G but my concern is about human well being could be at stake and we must be sure before it goes online. Besides, once AI is in-control (self aware), do you think it is safe for humanity? We don't have to underestimate the concept behind The Terminator and I Robot science fiction movies though we don't drive or motivate by them.

Totally agree with you Samuel Lakew and will keep following this thread to see if someone has some answers :)

Best Regards.

Yes, let's continue this thread to see if someone has new answers..It is a good platform to discuss our views..

Dear participants, thanks a lot for sharing your valuable views and concerns here on this forum.... and yes, we will keep open the thread, we will hopefully get some more information. Let me know if you learn some thing.

Cheers!

See its not the technology that is disastrous but its the application of that technology in destructive means which depend on the class of people who are employing it.

So 5G is not going to be harmful as mmWaves are highly attenuated by the propagation environment and further they are going to be used for microcell, if commercialized.

There are federal reserve on the amount of power transmitted through the radio transmitters and theses things are usually strictly monitored.

They question of super humans is just fictional thing, which has nothing to do with 5G.

Hopes, all is clear now.