Google wants to perform secret 6GHz tests in 17 states

[midian182]

Why it matters: Google wants to secretly test a 6GHz network in multiple cities and towns across 17 states. The company has asked the FCC for permission to conduct the experiment, which could be related to a future internet service under the Google Fiber Webpass banner.

Businesses Insider spotted a batch of FCC filings from Google, revealing it wants to experiment with the 6GHz spectrum to “produce technical information relevant to the utility of these frequencies for providing reliable broadband connections.” The company wanted the information in the document redacted, stating that “if subject to public disclosure, would cause significant commercial, economic, and competitive harm.”

The tests are expected to take place over 24 months “without harmful interference to other authorized users” in 26 cities and towns across 17 states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. California will be home to seven of the planned test cities, which include San Francisco and Los Angeles.

Back in April, the FCC unanimously voted to open a large chunk of radio spectrum in the 6GHz band for unlicensed use—the biggest spectrum addition since it cleared space for Wi-Fi in 1989. The new rules make 1,200 MHz of spectrum available for Wi-Fi and will authorize two use cases for unlicensed operations within that space.

Opening up the band paves the way for the Wi-Fi 6E standard. The 6GHz spectrum should offer faster Wi-Fi than 5GHz connections, but it is limited to shorter distances. Google’s plans for 6GHz could extend beyond internet services, such as vehicle-to-vehicle connections, but the mention of “broadband connections” hints at its wireless internet ambitions.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/86415-google-wants-perform-secret-6ghz-tests-17-states.html

 

[amghwk]

Which part of the news is "secret"?

 

[kimo1]

With high enough G, soon we can microwave food without a microwave oven. Just imagine: heating food on place. Never again will you have to settle with cold food or long forgotten coffee or tea.

 

[ColdSoup]

With high enough G, soon we can microwave food without a microwave oven. Just imagine: heating food on place. Never again will you have to settle with cold food or long forgotten coffee or tea.

Except higher frequencies do not penetrate solids and liquids well. The middle of your leftovers would be cold every single time.

 

[Uncle Al]

I would have no problem if they first clear 6G with certified and registered health physicist and issue an unedited report to the public. Otherwise I would deny their request until they logically explain why it's secret and why they don't want the health physicist to issue their own report.

 

[Lew Zealand]

6G gives you covid-20.

#aheadofthecurve

 

[seeprime]

Except higher frequencies do not penetrate solids and liquids well. The middle of your leftovers would be cold every single time.

Whew! I was concerned that I might be killed by this new conspiracy. It's good to know that only my skin will be destroyed. Just kidding. I'll be wearing one of those cool new SpaceX astronaut suits to not only be protected from the evil rays, but to also look stylish as I walk around in my climate controlled outer wear. They come in colors now! /s

 

[EEatGDL]

With high enough G, soon we can microwave food without a microwave oven. Just imagine: heating food on place. Never again will you have to settle with cold food or long forgotten coffee or tea.

Ehm... since the first generation of Bluetooth and WiFi revision 802.11b (1999) we've been operating in the ballpark of a microwave oven's frequency. It's all about power and a narrow bandwidth for heating purposes.
Quick physics class: a ~2.45 GHz microwave with enough energy will make water molecules vibrate, vibration causes friction between molecules, and that friction generates heat. That phenomena at that specific frequency is called resonance: when you apply a frequency close to the natural resonance frequency of a material, the oscillation is amplified.
So just increasing the frequency (5, 6, 60 GHz) and keeping similar levels of enery, only makes it more inefficient to achieve the same purpose (heating organic material containing water).

 

[Dyson Parkes]

I would have no problem if they first clear 6G with certified and registered health physicist and issue an unedited report to the public. Otherwise I would deny their request until they logically explain why it's secret and why they don't want the health physicist to issue their own report.

Except... they'd need to conduct testing in order for the physicist to be able to report. It's almost like they've requested permission to run tests...
As for redacting it... Anyone can claim to be an expert and make comments on something, and in this day and age the misinformation would simply be repeated so often it would do a lot of harm.
For example, take "nutritionists". So-called 'experts' in food - yet the term for someone qualified in that field is a "dietitian". That's the medically protected term. It is getting harder and harder to filter out the morons, so trying to prevent the misinformation makes more sense than trying to dispel it after the fact.

Ehm... since the first generation of Bluetooth and WiFi revision 802.11b (1999) we've been operating in the ballpark of a microwave oven's frequency. It's all about power and a narrow bandwidth for heating purposes.
Quick physics class: a ~2.45 GHz microwave with enough energy will make water molecules vibrate, vibration causes friction between molecules, and that friction generates heat. That phenomena at that specific frequency is called resonance: when you apply a frequency close to the natural resonance frequency of a material, the oscillation is amplified.

Finally, an actual educated response. I applaud your effort to educate the masses.
I tend to use the sun as a reference - specifically mentioning focusing output. Direct sunlight, fine. Through a magnifying glass? Damage. If I stand next to a fire? Fine. Stand in it? Burn.

 

[swilky]

Except higher frequencies do not penetrate solids and liquids well. The middle of your leftovers would be cold every single time.

No ones penetrating my solids.

 

[Markoni35]

Ehm... since the first generation of Bluetooth and WiFi revision 802.11b (1999) we've been operating in the ballpark of a microwave oven's frequency. It's all about power and a narrow bandwidth for heating purposes.
Quick physics class: a ~2.45 GHz microwave with enough energy will make water molecules vibrate, vibration causes friction between molecules, and that friction generates heat. That phenomena at that specific frequency is called resonance: when you apply a frequency close to the natural resonance frequency of a material, the oscillation is amplified.
So just increasing the frequency (5, 6, 60 GHz) and keeping similar levels of enery, only makes it more inefficient to achieve the same purpose (heating organic material containing water).

Yeah, but 2.4 GHz is not the resonant frequency of water. Among several resonant frequencies it has, which are much higher, the lowest one is around 48000 GHz (48 THz).

2.4 GHz was chosen as a reasonable optimum between surface absorption and deep penetration for the most abundant molecules in food (mostly water, but not just water). But there are higher frequencies that can cook the food (or humans) equally well.

 

[TheBigT42]

With high enough G, soon we can microwave food without a microwave oven. Just imagine: heating food on place. Never again will you have to settle with cold food or long forgotten coffee or tea.

Microwaves operate at 2.4 ghz

 

[Uncle Al]

Except... they'd need to conduct testing in order for the physicist to be able to report. It's almost like they've requested permission to run tests...
As for redacting it... Anyone can claim to be an expert and make comments on something, and in this day and age the misinformation would simply be repeated so often it would do a lot of harm.
For example, take "nutritionists". So-called 'experts' in food - yet the term for someone qualified in that field is a "dietitian". That's the medically protected term. It is getting harder and harder to filter out the morons, so trying to prevent the misinformation makes more sense than trying to dispel it after the fact.


Finally, an actual educated response. I applaud your effort to educate the masses.
I tend to use the sun as a reference - specifically mentioning focusing output. Direct sunlight, fine. Through a magnifying glass? Damage. If I stand next to a fire? Fine. Stand in it? Burn.

It would appear that you have little to no experience working with Health Physicist or people in related areas. They are all educated, heavily tested and certified. It is not an area that one can bluff one's way though. The problem now days is each individual's gullibility and not knowing how to check out credentials and verify them. In this particular case they would be certified by their respective organizational body credentialed through the Dept. of Energy. Anything less would be dubious and could not be trusted.

 

[DelJo63]

With high enough G, soon we can microwave food

except the article is related to the L O W end of the 5G spectrum :sigh:

 

[Dyson Parkes]

It would appear that you have little to no experience working with Health Physicist... ...The problem now days is each individual's gullibility and not knowing how to check out credentials and verify them.

I think you partially missed my point, and then reworded almost the exact point I was trying to make.
"Anyone can claim to be an expert and make comments on something" was directly relating to people not knowing enough to check the credentials of the person they're getting information from.
Along with my comment of "in this day and age the misinformation would simply be repeated so often it would do a lot of harm" - which I was intending to refer to people simply parroting information without verifying a source themselves.

People are gullible, and automatically accept information that matches the narrative or idea in their own head - regardless of whether it's correct (I think it's called confirmation bias, from memory). People don't fact check.