  chronoss2008 Premium join:2008-03-29 | has there been a study of all these waves about my head? has there been a study of all these waves about my head?
I put a egg in a microwave with neat results. | |
|
 |  EPS
join:2008-02-13 Hingham, MA | Re: has there been a study of all these waves about my head? Well if using this section of the spectrum didn't cause problems when there were TV channels there... | |
|
 |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |  openbox9
join:2004-01-26 Navarre, FL | Re: has there been a study of all these waves about my head? Not so worried about the mobile phone hanging on my hip since I'm good with the kids that I have, but holding it next to my head is a different story..... | |
|
 |   sdf
@comcast.net | you're more likely to die from skin cancer caused by UV rays from the sun than from TV rays | |
|
 |  goahead
join:2008-09-03
| said by chronoss2008 :has there been a study of all these waves about my head? I put a egg in a microwave with neat results. yes, rf is non-ionizing and does not harm human cells. at high power it causes water molecules to vibrate causing friction heat, but does not damage dna whatsoever. (this is just in case you weren't kidding haha) | |
|
 luckylar
join:2002-01-29 Hixson, TN | D-Block Auction Dumb FCC they should have played by the Teleco and Cable rules... Bundled D WITH C... bet the bidders would have whined like babies! | |
|
 |   ual
@bellsouth.net
| Re: D-Block Auction Heh - yep. Then the FCC could have just told them - "Well guys, trust us, bundling them makes it CHEAPER for you! Why if we had to sell these two separately we'd have to, positively HAVE to, charge you so much for each that you'd never want to buy both - which we want you to do. Then if we couldn't sell you the D block it would go away and limit your choices! You don't want to stifle bidder choices do you? That's why bundling is really in your best interest." | |
|
 |  EPS
join:2008-02-13 Hingham, MA
| Ah, but the difference is when telcos/cablecos bundle it makes them more money, but if the D block albatross had been hung around the C block's neck, it would have made them less money... and they'd probably have to get rid of the much ballyhooed "open access" provision to get even a halfway decent price. | |
|
 |  |
  MrMoody Liberal Capitalist
join:2002-09-03 Smithfield, NC | Control Just goes to show, if they can't completely control the spectrum, they don't want it. | |
|
 |   TK Junk Mail Go ahead, make my day Premium join:2002-03-03 Margate City, NJ clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Control said by MrMoody :Just goes to show, if they can't completely control the spectrum, they don't want it. The companies bidding are in it to make money. And if you don't have control over the spectrum you are leasing the chances of making a profit are diminished. Companies don't lease spectrum just to give $1 billion to the US Treasury or to some non-profit groups.
So, when onerous limitations are attached to the lease, why should they bid on it. So they don't. -- My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
 |  |  cornelius785
join:2006-10-26 Worcester, MA
| Re: Control I agree. It doesn't surprise me that a company, that wants to stay profitable, doesn't bid on the D block with the condition that a they build a network that they will probably see no profit from.
It almost seems like a better option would be to combine the C and D blocks into one block/auction with the requirement that all stations (assuming that the infrastructure is similar to TV and cell phone system-big central towers) are capable of both C and D block frequency operation with a special set of frequencies set aside for the emergency usage only. At least with this method, the idea they have for D-block would get implemented. | |
|
 |  |  |   rec9140 Provoice just DO it
join:2003-07-29 Mulberry, FL
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Control said by cornelius785 : requirement that all stations (assuming that the infrastructure is similar to TV and cell phone system-big central towers)
TV transmission via a single tower and
cell phone transmission via multiple "cells" are not even remotely similar.
A TV station can be putting out an ERP in the MEGA watts or MILLIONS of watts
A cell phone tower is nowhere even close to that kind of ERP.
The whole concept of cellular phones is to cellularize them to allow frequency reuse and increased capacity v. say the old IMTS system.
The only part of TV transmission that is similar to celluar would be TV translators which are lower powered fill in towers some on the same channel as the originator other times on different channels. For the most part TV has a single very high powered and high tower 1000+ feet and cellular may have 50-60 towers upto 200-300 feet for the same coverage area. A single tower in most cases is not neccessarily a single cell. Sectorization of towers allows 3 or more "cells" to be on a single tower. -- Ban all copyright, trademarks, and IP laws!//Lorem ipsum ei pro stet equidem labores, at enim animal expetenda nec. Ea vix argumentum dissentiunt, usu esse ridens ex. | |
|
 |
|
 |