Physicists develop key component for terahertz wireless

September 14, 2015
All communications networks need some form of multiplexing -- the ability to send multiple data streams through a single medium. Researchers from Brown have used a leaky wave antenna to separate terahertz waves by frequency. The work provides a viable multiplexing and demultiplexing strategy for future terahertz data networks, which have the potential to deliver data many times faster than today's cellular or Wi-Fi networks. Credit: Mittleman Lab / Brown University

Terahertz radiation could one day provide the backbone for wireless systems that can deliver data up to one hundred times faster than today's cellular or Wi-Fi networks. But there remain many technical challenges to be solved before terahertz wireless is ready for prime time.

Researchers from Brown University have taken a major step toward addressing one of those challenges. They've developed what they believe to be the first system for multiplexing terahertz waves. Multiplexers are devices that enable separate streams of data to travel through a single medium. It's the technology that makes it possible for a single cable to carry multiple TV channels or for a fiber optic line to carry thousands of phone calls at the same time.

"Any terahertz communications application is going to need some form of multiplexing and demultiplexing," said Daniel Mittleman, professor of engineering at Brown and senior author of a paper describing the new device. "This is, to our knowledge, the first time anyone has demonstrated a viable strategy for multiplexing in the terahertz range."

The research was published September 14 in Nature Photonics.

Today's cellular and Wi-Fi networks rely on microwaves to carry voice conversations and data. But the increasing demands for data transfer are quickly becoming more than microwaves can handle. Terahertz waves have a much higher frequency and therefore more potential bandwidth. Scientists and engineers have only recently begun exploring the potential of terahertz waves, however. As a result, many of the components for a terahertz wireless network—including multiplexers—have not yet been developed.

The multiplexer that Mittleman and his colleagues have been working on makes use of what's known as a leaky wave antenna. In this case, the antenna is made from two metal plates placed in parallel to form a waveguide. One of the plates has a small slit in it. As terahertz waves travel down the waveguide, some of the radiation leaks out of the slit. It turns out that leak out a different angles depending on their frequency.

"That means if you put in 10 different frequencies between the plates—each of them potentially carrying a unique data stream—they'll come out at 10 different angles," Mittleman said. "Now you've separated them and that's demultiplexing."

On the other end, a receiver could be tuned to accept radiation at a particular angle, thus receiving data from only one stream.

"We think it's definitely a reasonable solution to meet the needs of a terahertz communication network," said Nicholas Karl, a graduate student at Brown and the paper's lead author. Karl led the experiments on the device with fellow graduate student Robert McKinney. Other authors on the study are Rajind Mendis, a research professor at Brown, and Yasuaki Monnai from Keio University in Tokyo.

One of the advantages to the approach, the researchers say, is that by adjusting the distance between the plates, it's possible to adjust the spectrum bandwidth that can be allocated to each channel. That could be especially useful when such a device is deployed for use in a data network.

"For example, if one user suddenly needs a ton of bandwidth, you can take it from others on the network who don't need as much just by changing the plate spacing at the right location," Mittleman said.

The group plans to continue its work to refine the device. A research group from Osaka University is collaborating with Mittleman's group to implement the device in a prototype terahertz network they're building.

"This is a first-generation, proof-of-concept device," Karl said. "There are still things we can do to improve it and we'll continue to study it."

Mittleman hopes that the work will challenge other researchers to start developing components for terahertz networks.

"The biggest impact this may have is it may just be the kick that people need to start thinking about this issue," Mittleman said. "That means they'll start coming up with clever ideas that are entirely different from this one."

Explore further: Japan collab transmits record data speeds on terahertz waves

More information: Frequency-division multiplexing in the terahertz range using a leaky-wave antenna, Nature Photonics, DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2015.176

Related Stories

Japan collab transmits record data speeds on terahertz waves

November 25, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Researchers from Japan-based semiconductor manufacturer Rohm, together with a team from Osaka University, have come up with a chip that, in experiments, has achieved a wireless data transmission speed of ...

New terahertz device could strengthen security

November 21, 2014

We are all familiar with the hassles that accompany air travel. We shuffle through long lines, remove our shoes, and carry liquids in regulation-sized tubes. And even after all the effort, we still wonder if these procedures ...

New filter could advance terahertz data transmission

February 27, 2015

University of Utah engineers have discovered a new approach for designing filters capable of separating different frequencies in the terahertz spectrum, the next generation of communications bandwidth that could allow cellphone ...

Metamaterials shine bright as new terahertz source

April 23, 2015

Metamaterials allow design and use of light-matter interactions at a fundamental level. An efficient terahertz emission from two-dimensional arrays of gold split-ring resonator metamaterials was discovered as a result of ...

New device converts DC electric field to terahertz radiation

August 4, 2015

Terahertz radiation, the no-man's land of the electromagnetic spectrum, has long stymied researchers. Optical technologies can finagle light in the shorter-wavelength visible and infrared range, while electromagnetic techniques ...

Recommended for you

Spherical tokamak as model for next steps in fusion energy

August 24, 2016

Among the top puzzles in the development of fusion energy is the best shape for the magnetic facility—or "bottle"—that will provide the next steps in the development of fusion reactors. Leading candidates include spherical ...

Feeling the force between sand grains

August 24, 2016

For the first time, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) researchers have measured how forces move through 3D granular materials, determining how this important class of materials might pack and behave in processes ...

Understanding nature's patterns with plasmas

August 23, 2016

Patterns abound in nature, from zebra stripes and leopard spots to honeycombs and bands of clouds. Somehow, these patterns form and organize all by themselves. To better understand how, researchers have now created a new ...

Stretchy supercapacitors power wearable electronics

August 23, 2016

A future of soft robots that wash your dishes or smart T-shirts that power your cell phone may depend on the development of stretchy power sources. But traditional batteries are thick and rigid—not ideal properties for ...

74 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

gkam
1.4 / 5 (30) Sep 14, 2015
Great idea. I assume we will now find out what terahertz radiation does to us guinea pigs.
ab3a
4.9 / 5 (24) Sep 14, 2015
I assume we will now find out what terahertz radiation does to us guinea pigs.

The answer is still the same as all other non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation: Aside of heating effects, nothing else happens.

We've been researching this issue since the dawn of radio. Unless you discover some heretofore unknown laws of physics, there shouldn't be any significant concerns.
El_Nose
5 / 5 (11) Sep 14, 2015
@gkam

terahetrz radiation is radio waves transitioning into low level microwaves.

Everything you have ever been in contact with gives off terahertz radiation.... from ice to books, to paper, to pencils, anything above 15K gives off this radiation as a heat transfer vehicle. So no need for guinea pigs... we have been living with this since life began.

It is also non ionizing radiation... meaning it doesn't have enough power to kick an electron to a higher orbit or off an atom.. so it doesn't damage tissue or DNA or plants.
docile
Sep 14, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (26) Sep 14, 2015
Please do not give us the "it's everywhere, so it's okay" stuff. We are generating more intense concentrated waves with other frequencies.

Show me the intensity and spectrum of terahertz radiation form ice.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (27) Sep 14, 2015
Great idea. I assume we will now find out what terahertz radiation does to us guinea pigs.


Still want to claim you are some sort of expert on radio Skippy? When you say something as silly as that it makes you look like you stopped after the Air Force radio school in 1966 and forgot most of what they taught you since.

I bet you thought the "terahertz" thing meant something real exotic and wow-wee, eh? Skippy, that stuff is everywhere, us in the radio-know call it "infrared". It opens and closes doors for you whenever you go out to the market, and it changes the channel on your television. And opens your garage doors and keeps him from closing on the car too. It's everywhere Cher. Are you shaking in your new-agey Birkenstocks yet?

For being six different kinds of engineer, one of you said was the electronics engineer, you sure do say a lot of silly things that Google-Skippy could help you with if you weren't so quick on the trigger.
El_Nose
4.6 / 5 (11) Sep 14, 2015
@gkam

terahetz radiation is a form of heat like ALL radiation. If you want amplitude from ice it si small -- from your blood it is a lot larger. If it was IR radiation would you be up in arms - no cause you are used to thinking about the fact you give off heat in the IR band ... well you give off heat in the terahertz as well, because the weakest IR radiation is in terahertz frequencies. a photon can only carry so much energy at a certain frequency.

Go look it up and stop making accusations on a science site.
gkam
1.1 / 5 (27) Sep 14, 2015
No, it is YOUR assertion, so I want you to back it up. I want to see how much terahertz radiation comes from the ice you mentioned. There are differences in effects which can follow exposure.

We get it and even microwaves from cosmic sources, too, but too much microwave energy can give you cataracts. We need to find the exposure/threat by wavelength studies before we expose ourselves to more RF.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (21) Sep 14, 2015
Please do not give us the "it's everywhere, so it's okay" stuff. We are generating more intense concentrated waves with other frequencies.

Show me the intensity and spectrum of terahertz radiation form ice.
George prefers t shirt slogans like EM smog to actual thought.

Much easier than lengthy explanations and they feel so much better eh george? Just like when those meds kick in. You chase them down with a few shots of wild turkey?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Sep 14, 2015
"Show me the intensity and spectrum of terahertz radiation from ice."
---------------------------------

It's on all the T-shirts in otto's neighborhood.
Bloodyorphan
5 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2015
So when are we gonna get a Terahertz cable connection ??
Neanderthal_Genes
5 / 5 (3) Sep 15, 2015
The sun spews out a broad range of the electromagnetic spectrum including terahertz and ionizing radiation (think sunburns). Human sources tend to be much less intense.
abecedarian
5 / 5 (5) Sep 15, 2015
What's so hard about understanding an ice cube emits thermal energy? It's warmer than absolute zero, therefore is an energy emitter.

I think the confusion some seem to suffer comes from the obvious fact the ice cube is colder than the kitchen, and therefore is absorbing more thermal energy from the kitchen than it is able to radiate and therefore melts.
antigoracle
3 / 5 (8) Sep 15, 2015
Great idea. I assume we will now find out what terahertz radiation does to us guinea pigs.

Hmm... someone used you as a guinea pig, that might just explain your symptoms.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (11) Sep 15, 2015
No, it is YOUR assertion
@gkam
no, actually you started it with your first post that had no substantiating evidence, then argued
Please do not give us the "it's everywhere, so it's okay" stuff
the post he gave was valid and substantiated by a simple wiki search so:
I want to see how much terahertz radiation comes from the ice
start here:
Terahertz radiation is emitted as part of the black-body radiation from anything with temperatures greater than about 10 kelvin
https://en.wikipe...adiation

as Ice is above 10k, then it gives off THz
you want specifics, try searching literature, but it's NOT relevant, IMHO... because
we've been constantly exposed to THz over time, which is logical given the definition alone
http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.4153

that is specific to a CLAIM made
terahertz waves can "unzip double-stranded DNA"
and it also used experimentation to falsify it

is that adequate evidence? or you need more?
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (11) Sep 15, 2015
@gkam continued
also note in: http://arxiv.org/...53v2.pdf

there is methodology and exposure data, so, whereas you will not get specifics about Ice radiation of THz, you will see that exposure to THz doesn't unzip DNA... this is particularly relevant considering your implications above

this means that experimentation proves something specific (exposure to THzx doesn't unzip DNA) but also shows general effects of THz exposure
this is important
DNA is heavily screened from external influences by the cell membrane, the cytoplasm, and the nucleoplasm. The coupling to electric fields is further reduced by the effectively random orientation of a base pair displacement vector. The field strength necessary (estimated generously) to generate breather modes is approximately 10^9 V/m, which is much greater than the dielectric breakdown threshold of air (10^6 V/m)
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Sep 15, 2015
You stop it, too. You are wiki warriors playing semantic games. My point is natural sources of terahertz radiation are insufficient to cause harm. Before we increase our exposures perhaps we should conduct rigorous tests. Please stop taking these things to ridiculous extremes to make some point which is solely semantic.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (25) Sep 15, 2015
My point is natural sources of terahertz radiation are insufficient to cause harm. Before we increase our exposures perhaps we should conduct rigorous tests.


Skippy you don't think peoples have been studying infrared and peoples for a long time?

Please stop taking these things to ridiculous extremes to make some point which is solely semantic.


It is not sematical to say we get bombarded with all kinds of infrared all day, night and never are not bombarded by it. These things they are talking are not anything more powerful than the infrared stuffs we already use. It's making the transmitters and receivers do different things with it.

An electronical engineer who got his start building super duper electric battlefield stuffs for Robert McNamara would know all this.

Captain Stumpy
3.8 / 5 (10) Sep 15, 2015
You are wiki warriors playing semantic games
@gkam
no, i looked up the info and wiki provided the best explanation with references that also validated the ~5 other sites i was also using
Before we increase our exposures ...conduct rigorous tests
you mean, like this? http://arxiv.org/...53v2.pdf

Please stop taking these things to ridiculous extremes to make some point which is solely semantic
my argument is neither extreme nor based in semantics
it is an answer to your post and validated another
you wanted evidence, you got it

the only difference between my post and El_Nose is that i gave specific links to references that validated his and my claims - it especially validated
it doesn't damage tissue or DNA or plants
considering your posts, it was apparent that you didn't believe the lack of risk to DNA/tissue, therefore the included study specific to the point

so WTF is really going on?
Bloodyorphan
1 / 5 (2) Sep 15, 2015
Not sure if any of you are aware but I think IR is a different category , this is about EM amplifiers ....

http://www.eetime...=1324461
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (25) Sep 15, 2015
Not sure if any of you are aware but I think IR is a different category , this is about EM amplifiers ....

http://www.eetime...=1324461


Skippy, it will be bad for your reputation if you let ol Ira-Skippy be the one who sets you straight on stuffs. Stuffs other than towboats, towing and marine power plants I mean.

Terahertz EM IS infrared. What you think infrared means, eh? That is the section of the electromagnetic spectrum that is called the infrared. Just like visible light is also in the terahertz part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Visible light is terahertz EM and I don't see you people pooing your pants over flashlights and fiber optics.

nathj72
3.4 / 5 (10) Sep 15, 2015
Terahertz for communications is not happening any time soon, take a read of this article: http://spectrum.i...erahertz

The press release makes it sound like microwaves are running out of space and this is simply not true. Civilian use of microwaves has only scratched the surface. It is expected that the 5G cellular standards to be implemented around 2020 will finally start making use of the microwave bands between 6-71GHz. They still have not decided what bands, but there is a massive amount of bandwidth available. There is talk about reducing cell size down to 200m and using significant spacial multiplexing to achieve a large amount of data throughput.

@gkam I hope you are aware that terahertz radiation is the same phenomenon as AM/FM radio, cellular, light, x-rays, gamma rays. They are all described by Maxwells four equations and a full description of interaction with matter is provided by quantum electrodynamics.
Bloodyorphan
2.6 / 5 (5) Sep 15, 2015
OK Whatever ....
Terahertz radiation falls in between infrared radiation and microwave radiation


https://en.wikipe...adiation

ab3a
4.8 / 5 (18) Sep 16, 2015
@gkam If you want to make the case that non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation is risky, then I suggest you step away from your computer, and get busy building a Faraday cage for your bedroom. As an alternative, I suggest living in a deep cave. Don't come out until you're sure it is safe. I'm not sure how you'll prove that to your satisfaction, so I'll leave it to you to figure that out.

antigoracle
4 / 5 (4) Sep 16, 2015
@gkam.... I suggest living in a deep cave.

gskam is a hypocrite not a hermit.
Irukanji
4 / 5 (4) Sep 17, 2015
http://phys.org/n...tml#nRlv

As the comments state, from what I can tell, being it is in the general IR area, basic objects will block the signals strength easily. The actual usefulness of this product is low unless I am missing something?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 18, 2015
ab3a, I suggest you look into the effects of our RF smog. We are subjecting ourselves to stuff for which there is no biological history. It may well be there are not significant effects, but we have only been doing this to ourselves in the past few decades, insufficiently long to understand long-term effects. I suggest caution, not eradication.

Why do you folk go to extremes to make an erroneous point? Is that the way you react in class?
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (18) Sep 18, 2015
gkam, the subject is not RF smog.
We go to lengths to prove a point because you are erroneous.
When corrected, it is polite to say something like "Thank you ab3a, I had posted in haste, and had not considered the actual physics and physiology of the subject in question."

Why do you ASSume someone is a student because they correct you? You can see by his profile he has been posting here for 5 years, which is longer than you ever went to college.

Is El_Nose a student too? Neanderthal_Genes? abecedarian? Captain Stumpy? nathj72?

If anyone needed educating it would be you.

Try looking at the profile of some of these people and follow their conversations. You will find a lot of interesting viewpoints and information.

By the way, many of the posters have jobs in technical fields, trying the "react in class" putdown only reinforces their low opinion of you.

Especially when they correct you.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (20) Sep 18, 2015
ab3a, I suggest you look into the effects of our RF smog. We are subjecting ourselves to stuff for which there is no biological history
Perhaps your warnings would have more credibility had you not revealed that you have no idea what you are talking about in the above thread?

Maybe this is why youre not getting any work lately... potential clients google your name, come here, and read for themselves what a lying, fabricating, pretender you are.

They can see for themselves that your MS is not in environmental management as you claim but in 'life experiences', whatever that is.

At least they wont have to go through the painful learning curve all your previous employers did.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 18, 2015
otto and ottovan57 simply cannot debate an issue, because I got them angry. Like petulant kids, it is all they can refer to, needing to "get even" with the guy who beat them at their silly attack and gotcha game by being genuine.

Hurl all the insults you want, it reinforces my depiction of you folk and your silly adolescent needs to scream nasties across the playground.

If you like exposure to terahertz, go buy one of the machines they took out of airports, and go dose yourself. The rest of us will be interested.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (19) Sep 18, 2015
Gkam - I was not debating an issue. You asked a question and I answered it.

"Why do you folk go to extremes to make an erroneous point? Is that the way you react in class?"
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 18, 2015
exposure to...
@gkam
and again... you are constantly exposed to THz (see above links)

if there was any indication that your belief was relevant, it would be seen in NIH studies

for instance
you would see an incredible uptick and strong correlation with technology as well as the flooded market of PC's, laptops, smartphones, tablets, TV's etc etc etc...

there is no strong correlation in the NIH studies, nor is there any evidence.

you want long term studies?
even with the attempts to digitize the office starting circa 1990 and later (25 yrs min) and that the market was flooded with tech long before that, there is no correlation with increased exposure to THz that is seen

now enter the study: http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.4153

re-read my SEP 15 posts (or the study) and the reasons THz is not considered a large threat to DNA or damage

conclusions: the science doesn't support your claims or conclusions

so now you get personal because you don't have proof? Why?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Sep 18, 2015
My "claims" were that we should have more research. I presented no "proof", it was my opinion. What is it with you folk?

Correct yourself first.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (18) Sep 18, 2015
Think about the nature of where you are stating your opinions, and how you state them.

If I were to say the moon is made of green cheese in these forums, should I expect to be corrected?
If you were to say that we are guinea pigs to the effects of terahertz radiation should you expect to be corrected?

http://www.auburn...ion.html

Thanks for the link, Captain Stumpy, the paper is interesting.
ab3a
4.8 / 5 (16) Sep 18, 2015
ab3a, I suggest you look into the effects of our RF smog. We are subjecting ourselves to stuff for which there is no biological history. It may well be there are not significant effects, but we have only been doing this to ourselves in the past few decades, insufficiently long to understand long-term effects. I suggest caution, not eradication.

Why do you folk go to extremes to make an erroneous point? Is that the way you react in class?


Name one erroneous point I've made. You can not prove "safety." And what sort of "caution" could you institute? Shall we give out RF indulgence tickets? How in the world would that work? Get Real. You're bereft of any practical solution, yet you worry about a phenomenon studied for over a century, that hasn't even been shown to be hazardous after thousands of studies. Your assertions here are utterly unfounded, ridiculous, and not even actionable. And yet, you expect me to respect that. NOT!
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (17) Sep 19, 2015
I think we need long-term studies on the ruinous effects of psychopaths on society.

We need a consistent definition, a reliable way of identifying them via mandatory brain scan or similar, and laws passed which limits what they can do, where they can go, and who they can interact with.

The danger to civilization is great enough to warrant identification, compulsory treatment, and sequestration if necessary of these lying, cheating, thieving abusers.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (18) Sep 19, 2015
"[The psychopath] suffers from a very real mental illness indeed: a profound and incurable affective deficit. If he really feels anything at all, they are emotions of only the shallowest kind. He does bizarre and self-destructive things because consequences that would fill the ordinary man with shame, self-loathing, and embarrassment simply do not affect the psychopath at all. What to others would be a disaster is to him merely a fleeting inconvenience."
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (19) Sep 19, 2015
"At the present time, there is a veritable explosion of reports from our readers about their experiences with individuals they have encountered in the "alternative research" fields, as well as in general interactions of their lives. What is so shocking is the number of such individuals that must exist, based on these reports. This is not just an occasional event, it seems to be almost a pandemic!"

-Empty all the jails and fire all the social workers. Let science handle this.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
This otto guy is obviously SCREAMING for psychological help. It is the equivalent of writing "Stop me before I do more!" in lipstick on the mirror after a crime.

Can we get him off the forum, . . . and into "helping hands"?
docile
Sep 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2015
Thanks for the link, Captain Stumpy, the paper is interesting
@Estevan57
You are welcome. i thought so too... hadn't run across it in the past... and now i am looking for more data on the subject

That Auburn link is a GREAT one too... it will save a lot of time and characters posting in the future!
Thank you very much!

.
My "claims" were that we should have more research
@gkam
and when there is no justification to continue? at what point should we stop then?
never?
or when we find out that the effects are negligible?
when we see that the effects are not probable in any statistical way? (as noted in the study)

or when you feel good about the study?

this is a valid point here...

docile
Sep 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
Stumpy et.al., I YIELD. If you think there is no danger, I am not going to insist there is. But I still want one of you to dose yourselves and prove it to us.
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2015
But I still want one of you to dose yourselves and prove it to us.
@gkam
HELLO! ... I AM !!
in fact, so are YOU!!

that was the point of the links and the study!

you know... you started this with your comment... you IGNORED the data presented to you... that was obvious when you argued for further studies to alleviate your fears and ignored the fact you are constantly exposed to THz

if you're not going to read the studies or evidence then WHY ARE YOU STILL ARGUING THE POINT of "does" and "exposure" ????

especially when, as noted in the links above, you are continually exposed to THz ?????

i am not letting you off on this one. your comments are NOT logical, nor do they follow a rational POV. especially given the evidence presented.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Sep 19, 2015
"i am not letting you off on this one."
--------------------------------

Oh, really? Was my sin that I decried the increase of the RF smog in which we are submerged? Do you have proof higher doses for longer periods are "safe"?

Go buy one of those airport scanners they took out, and beam yourself for a while, and show us you do not have cataracts of any other change for the worse.

Or, . . dig out the studies showing the intensity and exposure times compared to what we will continue to get if we transition over from Wi-Fi to higher-frequency terahertz.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
Actually, I am hoping there are studies showing it is safe. We are all in it, pretty much. But my experience biases me to think otherwise until I see it.

Are there decent studies? You are the guy to ask.
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2015
Do you have proof ..."safe"?
@gkam
1- as noted in the above study
DNA is heavily screened from external influences by the cell membrane, the cytoplasm, and the nucleoplasm. The coupling to electric fields is further reduced by the effectively random orientation of a base pair displacement vector. The field strength necessary (estimated generously) to generate breather modes is approximately 10^9 V/m, which is much greater than the dielectric breakdown threshold of air (10^6 V/m)
2- there would be a correlation in NIH studies where (as also noted above) the exposure to modern technology spiked the instances of mutation/degradation of cellular structures, or other known exposure issues known to radiation and EMF
3- unless you can produce a study that can show correlation & causation that directly demonstrates danger, then given the above evidence you cannot claim that there is a hazard at all
ESPECIALLY given your constant exposure to THz

2Bcont'd
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2015
@gkam cont'd
Go buy one of those airport scanners they took out, and beam yourself for a while, and show us you do not have cataracts of any other change for the worse
can you show a correlation & causation between them and the high travelers who repeatedly utilise airports and security?
this would include:
Homeland security (secondary & primary exposures due to job)
Military (who travel frequently)
business travelers using aircraft
all cargo aircraft companies
pilots - Air staff

you made the CLAIM, now show your proof
Also note: the above are regularly studied by NIH (especially military, due to the ease of access to medical records and the medical release all soldiers take to accept experimentation without need to get permission) as well as OSHA and other organizations that regulate safety and exposure as well as dictate laws regarding medical requirements or coverage to those who've been exposed or injured by said issue (see also CFR1910)

2Bcont'd

Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2015
@gkam cont'd
dig out the studies showing the intensity and exposure times compared to what we will continue to get if we transition over from Wi-Fi to higher-frequency terahertz
READ THE FREAKIN STUDY BEFORE YOU COMMENT
it makes you look like you are intentionally trolling

better read those links above too... because, as they demonstrate, you are CONTINUALLY EXPOSED TO THz
or didn't you get that in the above posts?
Actually, I am hoping there are studies showing it is safe
you mean like this one? http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.4153

C'mon G... you just pulled a zephir/jvk
PLUS, you are IGNORING some really relevant and important info
forget your experience and actually READ THE LINKS, man!

the least you could do is link SOME sort of corroborating evidence for your argument...
WTF?
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2015
@last post gkam
But my experience biases me to think otherwise until I see it.
that is why i linked the studies and wiki definitions above
Are there decent studies? You are the guy to ask.
no, i am not
I simply looked for the information and found some key evidence [SOME - but very relevant and powerful]

my points above:
-the study says something VERY specific that argues exposure to THz is not threatening

-the NIH and health statistics do NOT show any uptick or threatening trends that are showing exposure to THz is dangerous (again, you are constantly exposed, especially around modern tech)

-your argument re: airport etc is not viable as those subjects are constantly monitored and medically there is no uptick in the stats showing correlation/causation there either (as noted in employees - and it must be monitored re: CFR's )

there really is a way to derive the safety of something like this

verstehst du es jetzt?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Sep 19, 2015
Seig Heil?

Once again, I made no claims, just voiced my opinion we need more research. Stop trying to make it something it isn't.

I made NO claims, you made the claims that I was wrong. Got expressing an opinion?

My god, you folk have gotten so into attacking others you are no longer rational.
TechnoCreed
4.3 / 5 (6) Sep 19, 2015
@Mister G
One thing you should know; your own body is radiating at a peak frequency of 18.23 THz http://www.wolfra...requency and when you are out siging Kumbaya by the campfire, you are in close proximity of a 71.62 Thz electromagnetic radiator http://www.wolfra...requency I hope this does not make you sick.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (16) Sep 19, 2015
Captian Courageous

Do not forget just what kind of creature youre dealing with here.

"Psychopaths are notorious for not answering the questions asked them. They will answer something else, or in such a way that the direct question is never addressed. They also phrase things so that some parts of their narratives are difficult to understand. This is not careless speech, of which everyone is guilty at times, but an ongoing indication of the underlying condition in which the organization of mental activity suggests something is wrong. It's not what they say, but how they say it that gives insight into their true nature."
http://www.cassio...path.htm
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
Seig Heil?


Is that the another one of your snidely snarkly glibby witty superior digs that falls flat on it's face because it doesn't mean or say anything Cher? All he asked was if you were having the problem understanding his "good scientifical approach" to questions like yours.

Now I am not a scientist or electrical engineer like you are not either. But I think he was saying there is not the reason to think that the terahertz EM is unhealthy and some reason to think it is not particularly harmful. In science stuffs you need some reason to ask the question, not just invent questions that are not founded in something.

Skippy, you really should do more listening than you do here with these peoples, they can teach you a lot. They have taught me a lot. But it is not a good place to pretend you are knowing stuffs you don't really understand because like I told, some of these guys REALLY know their stuffs and don't mind helping you look silly.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
Ira, you can only talk about me, it seems.

You lost the argument. Get over it.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (18) Sep 19, 2015
gkam, your comment makes no sense.
Ira was making an observation, not a statement for an argument.
All anyone can do here is "talk about it". But the talk needs to be backed up with either provable experience or reliable sources of information. That is where you fall short.

When 4 or 5 people tell you the same thing in a thread, like "Read the links" it would be helpful to the entire thread if you did, then consider what you have to say based on the info they contain.

Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (6) Sep 19, 2015
Seig
@gkam
poor taste & trolling?

i wrote "verstehst du es jetzt?" (do you understand now) because you didn't seem to be comprehending English

Now, when you said
I assume ...
in your first post, that was OPINION, and not a big deal
HOWEVER, when you said
Please do not give us the "it's everywhere, so it's okay" stuff
well, it IS
Show me the intensity and spectrum of terahertz radiation
WE DID
There are differences in effects which can follow exposure... Before we increase our exposures perhaps we should conduct rigorous tests
THOSE are NOT OPINIONS
& those last statements are directly REFUTED by the study that i provided (the rigorous test)

they're not "semantic games" - it's SCIENCE

Now, if you think your experience trumps SCIENTIFIC FACTS, then support it with EVIDENCE

if you can't admit you're wrong: fine
you can be that way
but that is the cowardice you claim others present

also:
you pissed me off with that uncool nazi crap-o-la
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
Well, tough, I do not speak whatever language you used, so I assumed it was insulting coming from this forum.

No, I have been wrong, as the use of bases for North Vietnam, which I forgot. I had a buddy working the F-4's at Da Nang.

Get off the personal attack bandwagon. It diminishes you.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (23) Sep 19, 2015
you pissed me off with that uncool nazi crap-o-la


Lost any hope of rehab with me when we were talking about all people belong to tribes, and I was mentioned the Mardi Gras Tribes, he said the only tribes in New Orleans were cockroaches the Official State Insects ". Mrs-Ira-Skippette is the Creole (a little bit Cajun a little bit English and a whole lot Black) so I think I know something about slurs me. It that wasn't bad enough he added to it the next couple of days later and was making the gay slurs at me and at otto-Skippy too.

I hate that kind of liberal hypocrite. So if you are wondering why I have been extra ruff on him lately, that is why. For Mrs-Ira-Skippette who he thinks is our state insect the cock roach. I wish he would go down the 9th Ward in New Orleans or the Algers over the river from New Orleans with some of that "Mardi Gras Tribes of Cockroaches are the State Insect", he would be rethinking the thing about him not needing the equalizer no way.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
Get off the personal attack bandwagon. It diminishes you.


Skippy, I done showed you where your very FIRST postum on the physorg was a personal attack with snide name calling. The FIRST ONE.

You still don't believe physorg keeps them all for ever and more evers? P'tit boug, every silly thing you ever wrote is still for everybody to see any time they want to see it. So you are the hypocrit and the liar, and the not to good at it pretender too you. Peoples like you always show your true colors sooner or maybe later but mostly sooner.

That is the scientifical proof that you are really stupid, you just can't believe your game has fall apart because to be sure nobody is as smart as you. Tell the trut Cher, you really believe everybody here on the physorg is being so hard headed and mean because they refuse to be convinced or stay convinced of just how wonderful smart you are.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (22) Sep 19, 2015
" he said the only tribes in New Orleans were cockroaches the Official State Insects"
--------------------------------------

I did NOT! You have gotten so out of control and caught up in your need, like otto, you invent things I am supposed to have said. When I talked about your roaches, I was talking about the real insects. They are horrific, and probably comprise most of the living mass of the South. When I remember my service there, I still smell decaying vegetation and can still see the ground move at night, when the roaches came out.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (19) Sep 19, 2015
http://phys.org/n...nia.html

Middle of the comments.

Liar.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
he said the only tribes in New Orleans were cockroaches the Official State Insects

I did NOT!


You DID Skippy. We were talking about belonging to tribes.You said you did not belong a tribe. I said everybody does that is what makes us humans Lose your tribe you lose your humanity. I said even you and I both of us belong to tribes, maybe not Mardi Gras Indian Tribes but tribes all the same.

Then you come back with "the only Tribes I saw in New Orleans were the state insects cock roaches"

You have gotten so out of control and caught up in your need, like otto, you invent things I am supposed to have said.


P'tit boug what's up there is what you said.

I was talking about the real insects


We were talking about humans belonging to tribes? You and me both belong to tribes? How that is what makes us humans? So you just decided you wanted to start talking insects being the only tribes in New Orleans? (Roaches don't live in tribes. Colonies or nests)
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Sep 19, 2015
Once again, all you can talk about is me. Do you have a life of your own?
TechnoCreed
4.6 / 5 (10) Sep 19, 2015
@Mister G
What about you? Do you have a life? 25 comments spread on a 7 hour time span when it is a beautiful day in California; I checked it out for you, maybe you should open the blinds?

Maybe... you should be more thoughtful when you write comments online.
gkam
1 / 5 (21) Sep 19, 2015
Yeah, I just came in. I go out and enjoy our days. How about you?

"thoughtful" like otto?

I am defending myself from internet trolls, character assassins, and vandals. I gave up thoughtfulness for defense.
TechnoCreed
5 / 5 (8) Sep 19, 2015
9 PM here in Montreal, the background is humming at 17.41 THz at the moment (73 degrees for you) with a little bit of rain; that is kind of uncommonly warm weather in late September; the evenings here are usually much cooler. In all a perfect time to relax at the end of the day.

Why are you always in defense mode when I write a comment to you?
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Sep 20, 2015
I do not speak whatever language you used, so I assumed it was insulting
@gkam
perhaps you could learn to use this: https://translate.google.com/

then you can make INFORMED decisions
Get off the personal attack bandwagon. It diminishes you
really? what have i said that was INCORRECT?
point it out, g... or do you mean i should say things like
The only tribes I saw in your area were the hordes of huge roaches! Immense roaches, the State Insect!
if that is the road you want to go down, gkam, then fine...
I did NOT!
yes, you DID say it: Estevan57 was kind enough to link your posts
all you can talk about is me
you MADE it about you, gkam

again: what was my advice when you first started posting?

and you were not defending yourself from trolls etc from me above:
you are defending yourself for ignoring science, not checking facts, not supporting conclusions with evidence and lying

you got MAD because you're WRONG

I'm done with this!
gkam
1 / 5 (20) Sep 20, 2015
If you want to think I would mean people when I said "The only tribes I saw in your area were the hordes of huge roaches! Immense roaches, the State Insect!", then I cannot stop you and your need to do so. The ground would crawl with them at night.

"evidence and lying"

A fragile ego is a dangerous thing, Stumpy. Go look at your own recent posts for evidence of it.

"I'm done with this!"

Thank you.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Sep 20, 2015
A fragile ego is
you want to talk psychology?
...circle the wagons, hyper-vigilant against attacks, challenges, feedback or questions. We get prickly and rigid, insistent that we're on top of things, precisely because we're not. To those around us it can look like the height of arrogance but it's actually vulnerability. We don't think more of ourselves, but less and are grasping for the self-certainty we've lost
https://www.psych...ttle-ego

before you argue, you better be sure of your facts.

shall we dissect your own posts above & elsewhere?

i will not reply to any more of your posts in this thread because, as you can see by my evidence above, you are falling apart and a critique will likely send you into a downward spiral.

i will give you the last word now, since it is something you need

however, i will suggest you consider stopping for a while and seeking COUNCIL
gkam
1 / 5 (20) Sep 20, 2015
The word is counsel.

But thanks for your tough-love.

I simply am not going to play your little gotcha games here, and have business to do regarding such.

Good luck, you guys, hiding from everybody.

docile
Sep 20, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
docile
Sep 20, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (18) Sep 21, 2015
I did NOT! You have gotten so out of control and caught up in your need, like otto, you invent things I am supposed to have said
This is a lie. I have taken the time to substantiate all claims of lies and fabrications. And you have read all of them.

Conversely, you declare that I lie and play games but provide no evidence whatsoever apart from the fact that, because you use your real name, people should believe everything you say.

Sorry but you have thoroughly trashed the name george kamburoff here. You have no one to blame for this but yourself.

How many times has this happened in the past?

If you were able to acknowledge your sickness then you might finally be able to break the cycle.

But sadly you are too old, too sick, and too oblivious for that to happen.

Why dont you stop wasting the time of those psycho doctors down at the VA? Im sure THEY know you are a lost cause.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.