Maximum permitted leakage from a microwave oven is 1 mW/cm^2, up to 5 mW/cm^2 empty.
From: Adam Moffett Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 2:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RF exposure concerns That would be -92dbm on a 1 square meter antenna right? Sat TV signals are stronger than that I think....I want to say -80's. Does channel width matter in this formula? Seems like there would be more total watts if we're summing 30mhz worth of spectrum. On 12/14/2015 3:19 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Found this: “The solar microwave flux is nominally an absolute flux, one solar flux unit defined as [the very small amount of] 10 -22-22 Watt per square meter per Hertz.” So, 10^-22 would be 10^-19 mW times 6 x 10^9 HZ or 6x10-10mW 10 log 6x10^-10 = –92 dBm of solar radiation. Makes sense the satellites are probably about that weak too. From: Adam Moffett Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 1:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RF exposure concerns Right. I was hoping some chart would show me w/m2 from the sun near 6ghz, which I could compare to exposure numbers published by the backhaul manufacturer. Then I could say (backed by primary sources) that it's 10x (or whatever) worse to stand in the sun than to be near this dish. On 12/14/2015 3:01 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Stronger than the satellite signal. From: Adam Moffett Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 12:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] RF exposure concerns What kind of intensity of microwave energy do we receive from the sun? I found several charts in nm, but I couldn't readily find one showing 5-6cm wavelengths. On 12/14/2015 2:39 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote: tell them 6ghz has been found to dissipate chemtrails, he will get behind you On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: You'll also never convince the crazy ones. They made up their mind before they opened their mouths. You can only hope to minimize the fear and uncertainty they can spread. On 12/14/2015 1:46 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Tell them all that the cell phone in their pocket is exposing them to about 1 million times more RF than a rooftop installation. Moreover, the 6 GHz system will focus the energy to "pencil beam " that points away from the library. Furthermore, their wifi in that building will expose them to thousands of times more RF than the rooftop system. Does the Library have wifi now? Do they use cell phones now? If so they are hypocrites. You can get into dBM and antenna patterns but I find it best to keep it dumbed down as much as practical. -----Original Message----- From: Craig Baird Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 11:19 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [AFMUG] RF exposure concerns We have been working with a nearby city to bring Internet service into their area. The city government has been very cooperative because the existing service in the area is exceptionally poor. Our plan is to feed the city with a 6 GHz licensed link to the rooftop of the city library. From there we plan to redistribute via unlicensed. We are on the agenda to present our plan for use of the library roof to the city council this week. I just got an e-mail from the City saying that a "concerned citizen" has contacted them saying he felt there were FCC issues and regulations with placing equipment on the library due to potential RF Exposure to "children and customers of the library". Anyway, this guy is preparing an informational packet to give to the City Council at the meeting. Obviously, I'm not sure what this informational packet will contain, but I'm pretty certain it will largely amount to fear-mongering, and will likely imply that we will give cancer to anyone to enters the library. I'd like to be prepared with some solid data on RF exposure from 6 GHz licensed microwave. Can anyone point me to something that would be helpful? Thanks! Craig -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
