Advertisement

Blog

Superseding the 5G Flop That’s Disappointing, Costly, and Dangerous to Your Health

5G is falling on its face due to poor signal integrity. Despite the hype by AT&T, Verizon, and what’s left of Motorola, the major communications companies are under delivering 5G while back filling with excuses and hand waving that is typical of corporate America [5,6]. Thus far, 5G has been a big failure that is costly and may be detrimental to health. There is a solution, however, first one must identify the problem.

5G has severe limitations as well as cost and safety concerns similar to a technology war that took place a century ago. During the effort to bring electrical power to the United States, Thomas Edison was trying to convince the US that his DC power alternative was superior to George Westinghouse’s AC power. Edison focused on safety concerns in an attempt to make both business and the public forget the fact that Edison’s solution would require a voltage boosting facility every 100 yards. AC, as Edison tried to show, was much more dangerous than DC.

Edison went so far as to shock to death dogs, horses, and even an elephant [4] in order to prove his point. In the end, Westinghouse’s AC prevailed due mostly to the transformer, which at the time was an innovative technology. Other inventions quelled the safety factor concerns with AC while paving the way for the power grid that safely delivers reliable power nationwide as well as around the globe. Currently there exists a technology that will solve 5G. However, getting corporate America past the NIH attitude is proving challenging.

Today’s technology war is much like that of over a century ago with one big difference; the better solution offers a safer alternative while consuming way less power and costing much less. As companies transition from 4G technology to 5G, a host of problems, safety concerns, and elevated cost factors take away the luster of the so-called faster and more reliable new generation of throwing bits and bytes around.

Problems with current 5G solutions include the faster microwave frequency where “4G uses between 1 to 5 Gigahertz frequency. 5G uses between 24 to 90 Gigahertz” [1]. This shorter wavelength transmission signal does arrive faster, however it’s at a high loss of other niceties. First and foremost, the shorter 5G wavelength means towers must be much closer to the receiver’s phone. Obstacles such as trees and buildings and even double pane windows also cause an issue by blocking, diverting, or degrading signal quality. As a result, signals will have to be directed with beam-forming which uses much more energy while also directing harsh levels of energy at the user, thus resulting in a potential health hazard.

This elevated energy level along with towers being adjacent to users is causing a great concern among the health communities [2] who already link lower power communication signals to a rise in the number of cancer cases. Furthermore beam-forming is in itself inefficient as it does not allow the receiver to deviate from the beam direction. So that autonomous vehicle that’s adding boatloads of bit stream to the overcrowded bandwidth just lost its bearings simply by turning a corner. In the millisecond it takes to reacquire the signal who knows how many people just got run over.

In a manner similar to Edison’s DC power need for additional voltage-boosting substations, vast numbers of transmission towers are going to be needed in order to propagate 5G to users. Not only will this add cost for expanding the infrastructure, much more power will be consumed. In addition, the big carriers are lobbying at the federal level while winning legislation that limits the ability for governments to defend citizens at the local level. As with many large industries such as automotive, oil, tobacco, alcohol, and big pharma, it’s the consumer that’s left paying the tab for products that are touted as being advantageous while in reality they do much more harm than good.

Fortunately, all is not bad news when it comes to the failures of 5G. Out of the ashes of destruction, new technologies often arise to save the day. It happened when Westinghouse won the AC/DC war. The potential for another big win is possible with an advanced communication technology by simply adding a stable, reduced-noise PLL for signal referencing.

While the new 5G wireless suffers from the even more limitations than previous standards, it also significantly reduces signal transmission distance with the roughly 10 times increase in transmit frequency. Limitations in cellular transmission are due mostly to the pronounced channel noise from down conversion and the use of quadrature architecture with large constellation sizes. Due to spherical spreading, 5G can increase transmission frequencies to achieve higher throughput and to improve reliability. However, this method severely limits range resulting in the need for additional, nearby transmission towers thus exponentially increasing costs. Again, a tower will have to be built in increments of every football field AND you will have to be in the path of the beam or forget getting the signal.

Another problem exists with QAM, or Quadrature Amplitude Modulation. The AM in QAM is like your AM radio as the amplitude modulation is a signal on top of a signal. Like AM radio, it is a poor method of transmitting signals as you may recall when passing under a power line while listening to AM radio. The signal would often give way to amplified noise from the power line, a most unpleasant experience that one does not easily forget once they have encountered it. Couple this QAM signal deficiency with the fact that 256 variations (called constellations) are used and it’s no wonder why bit checking is required to ensure the signal was properly received. Bit checking only slows response time by adding more people in an already long line at the DMV.

It masks itself similarly too by jumping from O265 to I297 and keeping you guessing as to when your number will REALLY be called? Don’t you hate that? Well, you’ll hate 5G to when you see your cell bill going up along with a bunch of towers in your neighborhood. The good news is you won’t have to thaw frozen items long as the microwaves will do it for you and leave you feeling a bit funny from the dangerous power levels cooking your heart like it does food. Eliminating QAM means eliminating a host of power related increases as well as slowing transmission rates due to bit checking. With the advanced iW technology, a robust, Frequency Shift Keying (FSK) signal close to the carrier frequency can be used thus improving signal quality while reducing the need for bit checking and extreme transmission power levels.

There exists a need for stronger signals that can be transmitted at lower frequencies thus increasing signal transmission range and requiring fewer towers to boost the signals. The improved advantage offered by the iW technology enhances 5G design by eliminating the down conversion and large constellation sizes associated with 5G architecture.

Simply by Changing out the PLL, a 140x Improvement in Transmission Distance Can Be Realized

 

Simply by Changing out the PLL, a 140x Improvement in Transmission Distance Can Be Realized

 

As seen in the visual above, the advantage was modeled using Mentor tools to simulate a 5G system’s performance as it tends to illustrate the technology at equal average bit energy. Like with 5G, this technology achieves the same 1.5 Gb/s throughput, while requiring 10,000,000 times less transmit power for the same reliability with more than 140 times further range. This equivalent reliability signal is transmitted at much lower 3 GHz iW technology carrier frequency as opposed to 5G’s microwave level 28 GHz. The result is the elimination of potentially health degrading microwaves due to transmitting a signal at a lower frequency and a lower power level.

The Advantage is Clear as Shown in this Comparison of QAM Signaling Versus iW Technology

 

The Advantage is Clear as Shown in this Comparison of QAM Signaling Versus iW Technology

 

Combine this stronger yet lower power signal with needing only 2 constellations, versus 256 for 5G, and iW technology transmits a much more error-free signal a distance of 16 kilometers—140 times further than 5G with 114 meters at equal average bit energy. Current 5G technology only transmits roughly 1/100th the distance of previous generations as a result of free-space loss only. Couple free space loss issues with the need for additional beam forming power and circuitry and one can clearly see the advantage is significant. Whereas cell towers transmit 12.5 kilometers with the current 4G wireless, 5G transmits anywhere from 125 meters to a very optimistic 150 meters.

Thus, a whole new infrastructure will be needed and the cost will be passed along to the consumer as usual along with the cost for the additional power required to transmit signals at dangerous levels. These are the same fine service providers that keep raising your bill even though the infrastructure is in place and has been paid for many times over. They’re as happy to pass the buck along to you as the airline industry is having not removed the bag fees that were the result of higher fuel prices at the time. The fuel prices have since dropped however due to the pursuit of profits, the bag fees have not. Thank you sir, may I have another?

As with any market introduction, the higher population areas will see the initial installations of these limited 5G transmitting towers. For those further out who already suffer from poor coverage, good luck. But then again living further away might be a health advantage as those closer in will be glowing examples of increased health issues from the towers transmitting dangerous power levels in focused beams. This need for additional transmitting stations translates into antenna the size of small refrigerators being mounted on a pole roughly on every block, or a football field apart. Current 5G technology is the Edison DC transmission station nightmare all over again with a high power eyesore every few houses.

The graph below matches 5G published data to modeled data and uses Mentor Graphics software to demonstrate the solution advantage over the standard temperature range for communications hardware. Both iW technology (without unneeded beam-forming ) and 5G are modeled here for comparison. iW technology does not need to focus energy using beam forming. iW technology still achieves orders of magnitude greater range than current 5G solutions do with beam-forming. Hence the comparison shows the 5G range of 114 meters exhibits a 1 E-21 energy level which is broken per the 1 E-14 reliability spec.

Furthermore, current 5G implementation uses beam-forming to get to the published 125 meter range with reliable transmission so the signal may be lost when the drone changes direction to avoid a tree. If you think your Amazon package isn’t arriving now due to theft, wait until drones try accessing an already overburdened frequency spectrum with weak, intermittent signaling technology. Perhaps Amazon will use the same hand waving response that AT&T, Verizon, and Motorola [3,5,6] are.

The underlying advantage that enables iW technology is Instantaneous Loops (iL) with ideal phase coherence as shown in the graph below.

Instantaneous Loops (iL) with Ideal phase Coherence

 

Instantaneous Loops (iL) with Ideal phase Coherence

 

Shown in the figure is iL tracking a modulated input to the fastest possible modulation rate, half of either the reference or carrier frequency when used in wireless transmission. The ultra-low noise floor of the iW technology enables coherent reference tracking with far less skew than current 5G technology. This is due in part to the ultra-low and enhanced stability of the more advanced PLL that locks one million times faster than today’s technology resulting in signal acquisition times of nanoseconds versus milliseconds. In comparison, this is like speeding up on and off ramps and thus eliminating the traffic jams caused by adding information to the overburdened frequency spectrum. But then again, investors only wish to add more cars (software bits and bytes) to the highway instead of focusing on the real problem of needing improved hardware. How’s that golf game and profit margin, “boys”? No wonder golf is one of the few games based on lowering your score. Don’t worry, the next Angry Birds and Facebook is just around the corner. Guess you can wait another decade or maybe make some jingle sooner.

In comparison to current 5G technology, the advance iW technology solution would translate into 19 iW antennae installed between Los Angeles and San Francisco, versus the calculated 2660 5G towers to achieve the same throughput with the current pathetic plan for 5G. The resulting infrastructure cost of the superior iW technology solution would be 1.4% that of 5G. While the good old boys in the communications industry work deals on the golf course that provide you with sub-par 5G solutions that will be costly and dangerous, the real solution gets kicked aside due to the hesitation to adopt new technology. Imagine a golf score 1.4% of your current level.

Using advanced Mentor graphics tools as shown in visual below, the same tools that are proven in silicon many times over, an entire iW technology link can also be simulated—an impossible feat with 5G and QAM due to the many constellations that require individual modeling. Concerns over adverse physiological effects regarding 5G implementation are assuaged by iW technology, which has 1/10th the wavelength of current 5G solutions and orders of magnitude less average bit energy of both 4G and 5G. Not only does this energy reduction save resources and cost, the resulting battery life of cell phones will be much better with the iW technology. Note that energy is always conserved so the additional energy to recharge a cell phone using 5G will be much higher than a phone that incorporates the iW technology advantage. Phone size would also increase with the additional battery power needs as well as the circuitry required to amplify the poor signal of the 5G technology. Source [1] states, “That would require a 5G Moto Mod add-on, which more than doubles the thickness of the phone.” A In a society that is used to more compact future models, a marketing nightmare is in the making with 5G but then again why would that concern four company executives pooling their testosterone in a golf foursome? They’ll pass the buck along while hand waving and making excuses rather than coming to the table with a solution.

The Advantage of Improved Bit Rates Passes the Test of Temperature Extremes

 

The Advantage of Improved Bit Rates Passes the Test of Temperature Extremes

 

5G has been a failure that is only going to get worse. Building the infrastructure will take time, create controversy, and add cost as well as increasing the burden on the power grid. Health issues are also a major concern. Realize that hardware innovations such as iW technology can provide highly impactful improvements that disrupt the current market. This technology will enable the future of telecommunications while expanding digital signaling that result in faster upload speeds, higher bit rates, clearer signaling, extended ranges, and innovations such as drone deliveries and autonomous vehicle control all at a lower cost and higher reliability. Talk times and customer satisfaction will increase too. As consumers, you shouldn’t expect these advantages just like the big three automakers thought they knew what was best for the public in the automobiles of the 70’s. But then again, look at the percentage of foreign cars on the road these days. It really shouldn’t matter that consumers expect improvements when there’s a tee time to make.

No elephants were harmed during the writing of this article however a few egos may have been properly damaged. The real damage is to the profits that weren’t made, but then again, a lower golf score beats a higher income.

Summary bullets, iW technology advantages over current 5G technology:

  • the same 1.5 Gb/s throughput, but at 10,000,000 times less transmit power for the same reliability
  • iW technology transmits 16 kilometers reliably —140 times further than 5G with 114 meters at equal average bit energy; note again that the reliability of 5G suffers at 114 meters as 5G would require beam forming
  • iW technology operates at a 3 GHz iW carrier frequency as opposed to 5G’s current, dangerous 28 GHz
  • cell towers transmit 12.5 kilometers with the current 4G wireless, 5G transmits anywhere from 125 meters to a very optimistic 150 meters thus a whole new infrastructure will be needed
  • this would translate into 19 iW antennae installed between Los Angeles and San Francisco, versus the calculated 2660 5G towers to achieve the same throughput
  • The resulting infrastructure cost of the superior iW technology solution would be 1.4% that of 5G
  • Tower power and battery power would have lower cost with iW technology

References

  1. Why 5G will disappoint everyone; Wireless connections that are 20 times faster? What could be disappointing about that?”, by Mike Elgan, Contributing Columnist, Computerworld | SEPTEMBER 29, 2018 03:00 AM PT
  2. Why 5G Cell Towers Are More Dangerous”, David, Cornerstone Concepts LLC., no publication date provided.
  3. 5G can’t fix America’s broadband problems; Don’t expect the new generation of wireless tech to replace fiber, no matter what AT&T says“, by Karl Bode Feb 6, 2019, 8:47am EST
  4. Edison Fries Elephant to Prove His Point”, Wired website, Science, Tony Long, 1/4/2008.
  5. Motorola’s 5G Moto Mod speed test was massively misleading, The speeds are a lie — though maybe a lie of omission”, by Sean Hollister@StarFire2258 Dec 5, 2018, 4:23pm EST.
  6. The first ‘real world’ 5G test was a dud, AT&T and Verizon were supposed to show real 5G, but the speed is missing in Maui”, by Sean Hollister@StarFire2258 Dec 4, 2018, 7:48pm EST.

3 comments on “Superseding the 5G Flop That’s Disappointing, Costly, and Dangerous to Your Health

  1. ajawamnet
    August 19, 2019

    Thanks for the article – I’ve been bitching about this for some time now – how the hell that was gonna work. 20+ GHz? Geez, in the real world 5GHz wifi sucks… I will say that prime 2.5-3GHz thing Sprint/T-Mobile is trying to wrestle from the educational guys… a large chunk of some prime spectrum. Lots ‘o bandwidth.

    You never solve an engineering problem – you merely smear physics around until you can live with the result…

    The telcoms are smearing to the point of the thickness of graphene…

    So – how fast does the typical person need to post on facefack? Or download the latest trendy, man-bun, java-jockey crap? You really want to watch that HD movie on a 4″ screen? Really?

    Hey, at least the FCC made bank on the leases…

  2. MeasurementBlues
    October 29, 2019

    See Does 5G pose health risks? – Part 1 (of 3, with links to the other parts)
    https://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/5g-waves/4461754/Does-5G-pose-health-risks—part-1-

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.