5.8Ghz phones, less harmful than 2.4Ghz?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chaos' lil bro Order
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the potential health impacts of 5.8GHz cordless phones compared to 2.4GHz models. Concerns are raised about the higher energy frequency of 5.8GHz, but it is suggested that these phones may use less power, potentially mitigating risks. The 5.8GHz frequency is noted to be further from the resonances of water molecules, which could influence its safety profile. Comparisons are made to visible light frequencies, indicating that concerns about radiation from phones may be overstated. Ultimately, professional insights from physicists and biochemists are recommended for a more informed understanding of the health implications.
Chaos' lil bro Order
Messages
682
Reaction score
2
I was wondering about these new cordless phones running at 5.8Ghz, are they more harmful than the old 2.4Ghz phones, considering their frequency is over twice as energetic? Maybe the 5.8Ghz, use less power (amplitude) I don't know, but another thought is that at least the 5.8Ghz frequency is further away from the water molecule resonances around ~2.4Ghz.

Personally, I don't know what to think of the hoopla concerning phones and cancer or other ailments and I'd be curious to know what professional physicists think about this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
5.8Ghz is still a lot lower than the frequency of visible light ~10^15Hz, and people don't spend too much time worrying about light bulbs causing cancer. I am not so sure about exactly how they would cause cancer though - best ask a biochemist.
 

Thread 'Need help understanding particle physics and quantum physics'

So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
View full post »

Thread 'Raman Spectroscopy help'

I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?
View full post »

Similar threads

Help with Cell Phone Tower questions
Replies
9
Views
9K
Why do sunsets appear different colors than the sky?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Why does an alpha particle curve less in a magnetic field than a beta?
Replies
1
Views
2K
I Some questions about the photoelectric experiment
Replies
13
Views
2K
B Why is the BH Information Paradox Called a Paradox?
Replies
8
Views
2K
Destructive Interference & Cellular Phones Help
Replies
11
Views
4K
Mean Frequency and Frequency Spread of a Laser Pulse
Replies
3
Views
2K
Modern Digital Audio: Understanding Dither and Oversampling in Hi-Res Age
Replies
17
Views
4K
I Effect of impedance changes less than a wavelength
Replies
4
Views
2K
B Where am I wrong in this travelling faster than light Idea I've had?
Replies
17
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top