+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 65
Wireless Networks Thread, Wifi power levels compared to mobile phones. in Technical; Originally Posted by Jona I can't help thinking the physics here is a bit flawed, unfortunatly I don't really have ...
  1. #16
    farmerste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    339
    Thank Post
    100
    Thanked 23 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    21

    this is where i got the data from

    Quote Originally Posted by Jona View Post
    I can't help thinking the physics here is a bit flawed, unfortunatly I don't really have the time to prove it this morning.....
    hi i have attached the doc that i found the reading of 100 wW from here
    page 23 ( 29of64) in acrobat reader
    Last edited by farmerste; 18th March 2009 at 10:59 AM.

  2. #17
    Jona's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cranleigh
    Posts
    467
    Thank Post
    14
    Thanked 50 Times in 48 Posts
    Rep Power
    23
    Well isn't there a legal limit set by Ofcom for the power, otherwise it would potentially interfere with everything else in the 2.4ghz spectrum?

  3. #18
    Joanne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    1,420
    Thank Post
    103
    Thanked 101 Times in 94 Posts
    Blog Entries
    17
    Rep Power
    58
    thing is... so much stuff causes cancer these days; sun, food colouring, red meat, alcohol, smoking... if we were to try and avoid them all you'd just end up living in a bubble.

    People will get cancer FACT
    People will get cancer because of wifi... not so fact. You can't prove it unless you sit someone in a darkened room with an access point all their lives supping extra sanitised water and feeding them generic food....

    Wifi probably contributes to cancer, but what doesn't these days?

  4. #19

    webman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    8,400
    Thank Post
    636
    Thanked 961 Times in 661 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    319
    Ofcom - UK Frequency Allocation Table - shows just how crowded the 2.x GHz spectrum is.

    Ofcom - UK Fixed Wireless Access, Wireless LAN and Wi-Fi frequency bands quotes the 100mW effective radiated power limit. 200mW and 1W is permitted in certain 5GHz band allocations (802.11a) and upto 2W for licenced users.

    Without delving too far into radio theory and to stay within the context of the thread; radio signals will travel in a straight line from the antenna. Path loss caused by many factors (terrain - buildings, hills) is the reduction in power density. Upping the power may solve some problems but it is not guaranteed - that's the nature of radio waves. However, even if it did, and you were able to increase the amount of nodes you could reach - there are still a couple of issues to address. Antennas on the wireless nodes, are they directional or not?

    I also mentioned bandwidth. Say your 100mW wireless 'station' has a 10meg connection to the internet, and you have 5 wireless nodes connecting to it. Then you increase your power to 200mW, potentially increasing the number of wireless nodes. You still have your 10meg connection which may or may not be enough to support all the nodes.

    Ofcom - Understanding the Scope for a Power Increase for Wireless Broadband Access at 2.4GHz & 5.xGHz

    Further reading



    I'm a licensed radio ham so I have some understanding of the issues involved, but some of my knowledge is a bit rusty due to not being as active as other hams are. I'll take a computer keyboard over a radio mic any day
    Last edited by webman; 9th May 2008 at 03:16 PM.

  5. #20

    SimpleSi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    5,774
    Thank Post
    1,469
    Thanked 590 Times in 442 Posts
    Rep Power
    168
    why cant you just get a better access point
    Because the regulations in this (and many others) country have specified a maximum power that is well below any danger level that anyone is currently aware of.

    The regulators do tests - they try and determine what effect certain levels of radiation at the frequencies involved have on various parts of the body (skin vs internal organs) and then when they find a detectable effect at a particular level - they then normally say OK - lets reduce the maximum allowed to 1000th of this level and we should be alright.

    Sounds like a reasonable method to me

    But then again, I'm at ex-RF transmission engineer and look what its done to me

    regards

    Simon

  6. #21

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,986
    Thank Post
    850
    Thanked 2,652 Times in 2,252 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by farmerste View Post
    200mW one? why is it restricted to 100mW

    so for sake of argument, lets say a wireless access point out doors, when the signal degrades the further you are away from it, why cant you just get a better access point ? ( stronger signal- i.e more power ). using this idea building factors do not have to be taken into account.
    As netman said this only handles one side of the equation. Connectivity must go both ways, the laptop must be able to send back to the AP and so would also need to be increased in power putting the transmitter even closer. As laptops often have built in aerials that are not as good as a proper AP aerial it would need even more power to send information back to the AP.

    Your method is a bit simplistic as it leaves out the difference that the frequencies make. It does not matter if the power at that distance works out the same because it is not absorbed at the same rate.

    You could think of it like infra-red light, its just a small frequency change from visible light and yet you can see strait through a cup of coke with it as coke if almost transparent to IR. Same kind of thing with the wireless access, because of what people are made of they are more transparent to some frequencies (x-rays) than others wireless.

    The stuff in my previous post is not circumstantial but based on my ammature radio training and stuff that I have read on the subject of wifi.

  7. #22
    farmerste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    339
    Thank Post
    100
    Thanked 23 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    21

    A few more websites for digestion

    here are a few more articles to read :-

    Mobile And Wireless - Largest Biological Experiment - Health Supreme

    http://www.emfacts.com/papers/dect.pdf

    Report of the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones

    http://www.iegmp.org.uk/documents/iegmp_4.pdf

    http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3...07/PE1048B.pdf

    http://www.radiationresearch.org/Tru...submission.pdf

    Wi-Fi health risks are clouded by static - 15 May 2007 - IT Week

    the above are in no specific order, and i have tried to give a balanced sample of reports.
    i apologise for being away from this subject for a while, but i have been really busy, but my most recent finding/questions are :-

    why can you buy a digital cordless home phone, that can emit greter power than a resticted wi-fi point?

    and why are these so- called independant bodies, who perform investigations into dangers of mobiles/wifi etc have a short life span, is it just a funding issue ? or is money only given to the ones who give the required response?

    why also do the above scientific bodies purely base their finding on thermal effects generated, and ignore all other health related data as just coincedence ??

    why does the power measured at ground level from a mobile phone transmitter at certain points, not coincide with the theoretical power at those points ? ( in actual fact the measured amounts were much lower than what they should have been, but that only makes things worse when i am trying to compare the power outputs of mobile phone mast, to wi-fi point . the results mean you would be even closer to the emitter on the mast than thought previously)

    i like this icon, maybe i'll be a vagrant like they have in the states with tinfoil on my head, when i have been made redundant by BSF

    all feedback and viewpoints gratefully recieved

  8. #23
    enjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,485
    Thank Post
    282
    Thanked 196 Times in 167 Posts
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by farmerste View Post
    why are these so- called independant bodies, who perform investigations into dangers of mobiles/wifi etc have a short life span, is it just a funding issue ? or is money only given to the ones who give the required response?
    Can't comment on all of them, but I know that for the likes of HPA it will be a funding question - they will have been given x or a y-year grant. The people involved in those studies will now be working on something else.

    Thanks for the links, I'll read through them when I have a chance (not sure when that will be though!).

  9. #24
    farmerste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    339
    Thank Post
    100
    Thanked 23 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    21

    some more info found

    i have had another look at this, and i have found this recent document:-

    http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/pdfs/20...memorandum.pdf

    this documents backs up the findings in BBC's panorama programme last year, which caused an outcry ( of sorts ) and has an interesting illustration about power levels.

    **************************

    the next document i found was sent to a school outlining concerns, and i think it is a very good document, that could be used to give a balanced view of the current situation :-

    http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/pdfs/20...ifi_letter.pdf

    much better than my attempt, IMHO

    ****************************

    take a look at this also :-

    http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/pdfs/20061232_havas.pdf


  10. #25
    farmerste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    339
    Thank Post
    100
    Thanked 23 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    21

    found these today

    found a couple more interesting articles, the first is a radio show recording, so copy it to your mp3 player and have a listen, its about 1 hour long

    http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/the_s...alth_risks.mp3

    **********

    the next item is a document i found,

    http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/docs/section_1.pdf



    its got me scared now, does anyone know where you can buy foil hats??

    lol

  11. #26

    webman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    8,400
    Thank Post
    636
    Thanked 961 Times in 661 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    319
    Shame I can't find a "paranoia" emoticon.

  12. #27
    farmerste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    339
    Thank Post
    100
    Thanked 23 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    21

    no these smilies......

    no there is loads of smilies, but there never seems to be the one you are looking for, the paranoia one is missing, but so is the ' please don't take away my toys' one.
    if we like it, it must be safe right ?


  13. #28

    bossman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    3,898
    Thank Post
    1,182
    Thanked 1,053 Times in 748 Posts
    Rep Power
    327
    @farmerste:

    I think you are right to be alarmed as a NHS study done recently has found that there has been an increase of brain tumours in children between the ages of 8 - 16 by 40%.

    Now I am not saying that one thing is to blame here but I feel mobile phones have been on the increase over the past 5 years to such an extent that the ages of the young people using them has gone down from the average age of 14 to 12 years which I find quite disturbing.

    What I find alarming is the use of Wimax transmitters which are so power hungry and about 30-40% efficient being used in clusters around our towns and cities and people are not aware that in America the people around the local areas where these transmitters have been placed have suffered form radiation poisoning and have started legal proceedings against the phone companies who have installed them. I feel it will not be long before these phone companies and ISPs who initiate these wifi solutions will be up to their necks in lawsuits and will go cap in hand to the relative governments to bail them out.

    Don't get me wrong I am all for communication but in a safe environment for everyone.

    Bossman

  14. Thanks to bossman from:

    farmerste (3rd July 2008)

  15. #29
    Hacksawbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    North West UK
    Posts
    192
    Thank Post
    13
    Thanked 20 Times in 16 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    17
    Just to thread resurrect,
    Wireless N is now 'limited' to 1 Watt at a higher frequency.

  16. #30

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,160
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 318 Times in 260 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by bossman View Post
    What I find alarming is the use of Wimax transmitters which are so power hungry and about 30-40% efficient being used in clusters around our towns and cities and people are not aware that in America the people around the local areas where these transmitters have been placed have suffered form radiation poisoning and have started legal proceedings against the phone companies who have installed them. I feel it will not be long before these phone companies and ISPs who initiate these wifi solutions will be up to their necks in lawsuits and will go cap in hand to the relative governments to bail them out.
    Now that's quite impressive. Seriously. Managing to get radiation poisoning from a source which is in no way radioactive is a real achievement.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Unlocking mobile phones
    By edie209 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 24th December 2009, 12:05 AM
  2. Mobile phones in schools
    By gaz350 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 17th October 2008, 07:04 PM
  3. Mobile phones
    By kerrymoralee9280 in forum How do you do....it?
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 6th March 2008, 09:11 AM
  4. Mobile Phones - Suggestions?
    By acrobson in forum Hardware
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 9th January 2008, 09:56 AM
  5. Combined WIFI/GSM Phones
    By plexer in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11th September 2007, 07:57 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •