[^1]: https://www.bfs.de/SiteGlobals/Forms/Suche/BfS/EN/SARsuche_F...
SMH, they're talking about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiation
Next they'll issue an order to halt sunrise and the subsequent 1000W/m^2 of electromagnetic radiation
It's not halting sunrise but there's a directive[1] that basically says (amongst other) "don't work under the sun without protection".
[1] Amended proposal for a Council Directive on the minimum Health and Safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents — Individual Directive in relation to Article 16 of Directive 89/391/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ C, C/230, 19.08.1994, p. 3, )
Heat exhaustion and skin cancer are common in those kinds of industries.
Weird that we're regulating for 4W/kg of non-ionizing radiations
Not sure if you really mean that, but how is that so weird? It's a not man-made phenomenon and the regulation would go against freedom in far more serious ways than this regulation does. Likewise there is (in some countries) regulation against solarbeds but nog against the sun. However there is advice everywhere on how to deal with the sun: stay out of it at certain times and places. If you can and want.
People tried so hard to find the smallest negative effects of non-ionizing radiation (without p-hacking or silly surveys) and failed miserably. This is one of those rare cases where absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Incidentally, Tech Ingredients has a great video on using microwave ovens without an enclosure and how to block similar directed energy weapons that use a lot more than 5W: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg_aUOSLuRo
But taking into account the amount of heat a gram of tissue can reasonably absorb, it doesn’t cause any biological change whatsoever.
Non-ionizing radiation such as microwaves produces heating effects. At low power you may perceive warming and nothing else, at high power you'll surely be burned.
Heating from microwaves can be more damaging than say heat from a stove because the longer wavelength means heating starts from one's insides and will cause considerable tissue/organ damage before one realizes what's happening.
Microwave ovens can be very dangerous if the door interlocks are bypassed and the door opened whilst it's operating. People who are seen on YouTube doing this are either ignorant of the dangers or are just plain crazy!
Microwaves, especially shorter wavelengths above 5GHz (that's about 5 times that of mobile phones) are especially damaging to the eyes as interior of the eye doesn't have a good way of dissipating heat.
I was taught never to look into waveguides even when only used with receiving equipment as even the local oscillator can have enough power to damage one's eyes if concentrated in a small area. About 1W/cm^2 has a noticeable heating effect and from about 5GHz (approx 6cm wavelength) the CSA of waveguides is small enough to concentrate EM radiation of, say, 1W to do damage to one's eyes.
For mobile phones scale that figure down as the longer wavelength dissipates the power over a greater area (also remember area goes up by the square of the wavelength which means that phone wavelengths are much less damaging than microwave frequencies (>3GHz).
I'm not up to date on the latest research but from what I was taught I'd be concerned if more than 0.1W/cm^2 were entering my eyeball. In fact, if I recall the Russian standard for exposure was 0.1W/cm^2 which was considerably tighter than the US figure of 1W/cm^2.
Keep in mind those figures were for the microwave band which starts at 3GHz. As mentioned, because of the longer wavelength of mobile phones it's unlikely one could exceed those figures whilst using a mobile.
https://data.anfr.fr/anfr/visualisation/table/?id=ad8014ec-f...
I'm a bit worried now.
It's not related in anyway to the iphone 12, and was in fact released several months before it
How is this measured exactly?
Edit: same, in hmtl: https://www.anfr.fr/liste-actualites/actualite/temporary-wit...
Tap model number, copy, search it online.
Wear long sleeves.
Contact me privately for details about where you should transfer my compensation.
From the ANFR publication [1] «141 mobile phones, including Apple’s iPhone 12, have recently been tested to check compliance with limit SAR values».
I suspect they simply weren't tested before. sigh.
[1] https://www.anfr.fr/liste-actualites/actualite/temporary-wit...
A few years ago a French tech journal caught several huge chinese PSU maker who claimed they had all certification but during actual testing they would catch fire or short under 50% of rated load.
Which also means the fix can be a software update. That was (according to the news) the likely way this would be resolved.
They are like holding a fast blinking very dim led light and being worried about getting burned or some other undiscovered physical phenomenon from EM while staring at a monitor putting much more into your face.
I’m hoping the answer is a desire to make a joke and not something that indicates a disconnection with reality.
RF burns are real, but generally aren’t going to happen with consumer gear designed to operate inside your house.
But climb a cell tower and get on the wrong side of a backhaul and you’ll get burned pretty quickly. You can probably get there with some routers running OpenWRT with the power cranked up (not recommending this).
(Worked on RF gear for years and have experienced high power RF output).
I'm sure we could come up with a repeatable experiment for this that doesn't have any risk of burning.
Uh? I've never had that experience, any WiFi stuff I've used uses trivial levels of power.
I'd suggest you read my post on microwave radiation, also the one where I have received RF burns whilst working on transmitting towers where the radiated power was between four and five orders of magnitude higher than WiFi equipment.
Cellphone don't put out 4 watts let alone 4 watts per kilogram of a human full human, they might hit 4 watts per kilogram if you are only looking at a small amount of flesh near the phone which is what SAR looks at.
Its like determining CPU performance by looking at perf per watt just because has a high perf per watt does not mean its fast or faster than a much larger CPU.
For instance dancing is around 5 wh/kg for your whole body more than actually getting hit with a tennis ball every second!
The reason it is relatively easy to surpass the limit in a phone is that you use it from quite close, and the energy density decreases exponentially with distance.
So something like 300W for a human body seems like quite a bit of energy. But maybe it's not like poison where it's maximum amount per kilogram bodyweight, but it's more like the maximum for any particular kilogram of tissue.
But even when pelting someone with uniform light rather than physical objects, a 300W IR lamp would be pretty noticeably warm I think.
Anyway it was more than I thought. I was expecting some figure that could easily be dismissed as 'impossible to cause any physical effect, let alone harm'.
Maybe that's why
Watts are per second, Joules are total energy (watts * seconds). 4 Watts would be per-second.
Doesn't the same apply for cellphones? They're not exactly known for having exposed antennas.
No doubt cell towers will burn unless one has considerable skin area in contact with the metal mast. I recall being on broadcast transmitting masts where 10s of kW were being radiated and RF burns were accepted as an occupational hazard.
Keeping one's hands firmly clasped to the mast was essential to avoid burns. Nevertheless, some burns couldn't be avoided, for when clinging to the tower one's legs are often wrapped around the mast or a part of it. I recall a good pairs of jeans and overalls being ruined by the RF arcs between the mast and my knees. The pants were peppered with burn holes several mm diameter. Similarly, my knees had multiple RF burns on them.
One should wear shorts in such circumstances so one could keep in full contact with the metal surface but TX towers are often cold and windy places.
Incidentally, I once had a Seiko digital watch ruined on the tower, its LCD went totally black. Also, one can't use a digital multimeter either for the same reasons. However, with precautions we could use ancient analog multimeters so long as they used copper oxide rectifiers—as they had an upper cutoff frequency of about 10kHz. The only meters we found suitable were AVO-8s.