Re: wireless TV repeater
Superman
> "Superman"<"c/- Lois.Lane"@metropolis.com> wrote in message
> news:aZ1Ym.63977$ze1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>> HeadRush wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "|-|ercules"<h@r.c> wrote in message
>>> news:tBsXm.63569$ze1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm thinking of renting a 40 inch LCD TV for my bedroom, but the antenna
>>>> socket is in the loungeroom,
>>>> rather than run a cable can you still get those TV repeaters? Do they
>>>> work with digital?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You do know those "TV repeaters" use brain penetrating microwaves to do
>>> their thing don't you?
>>>
>>>
>> Is that true? or is this just a typical aus.tv nonsense post? mine runs at
>> 2.4mhz which is the same as (some) cordless phones. (my cordless phone is
>> on 5.8mhz) If what you say is true, then it applies to cordless phones as
>> well.
>>
> No, it would run at 2.4GHz, not MHz.
>
> From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_oven
>
> A microwave oven works by passing non-ionizing microwave radiation, usually
> at a frequency of 2.45 gigahertz (a wavelength of 12.24 centimetres (4.82
> in)), through the food. Microwave radiation is between common radio and
> infrared frequencies.
>
Yes, I meant GHz not MHz. But the point of my post was to ask if there
is any health risk associated with such transmissions. Now that WiFi
networks are also becoming commonplace one has to wonder. In a microwave
oven the raditaion is confined within it, but with these other devices
it's transmitted throughout the household.
> HR
>
>
>
--
rgds,
Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com
"We stopped the boats coming. The facts speak for themselves. People knew where we stood. We didn't try to be all things to all men. Look, our policy worked. There was no need to alter it" - John Howard
"Our journalists are finally noticing the elephant in the room. Rudd has given us grocery watch, fuel watch, a national dept our children will still be paying, an ETS scheme that will further bankrupt the nation without making an iota of difference to global warming. Rudd is all spin and no substance. Even worse, he expects to fool all people all the time." - media comment
"I don't care what you f__kers think!" - The Hon Kevin Rudd MP, Prime Minister of Australia
Jasen Betts
>
> Yes, I meant GHz not MHz. But the point of my post was to ask if there
> is any health risk associated with such transmissions. Now that WiFi
> networks are also becoming commonplace one has to wonder. In a microwave
> oven the raditaion is confined within it, but with these other devices
> it's transmitted throughout the household.
>
The microwave oven operates at several hundered times the power level
of the wi-fi equipment. this is greater than the difference between a
hair dryer and an oxy-acetylene torch,
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
fritz
"Jasen Betts" <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote in message
news:hgvik5$mgu$2...@reversiblemaps.ath.cx...
> On 2009-12-22, Superman <"c/- Lois.Lane"@metropolis.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, I meant GHz not MHz. But the point of my post was to ask if there
>> is any health risk associated with such transmissions. Now that WiFi
>> networks are also becoming commonplace one has to wonder. In a microwave
>> oven the raditaion is confined within it, but with these other devices
>> it's transmitted throughout the household.
>>
>
> The microwave oven operates at several hundered times the power level
> of the wi-fi equipment. this is greater than the difference between a
> hair dryer and an oxy-acetylene torch,
Very true.
Also, unless you are in the habit of sticking your WiFi antenna up your
arse,
you are likely to be of the order of a meter away from the source.
Cellphones are potentially far more dangerous, 'coz you virtually stick 'em
in your
ear. (The old distance squared law of radiation).
But even they have been cleared of any measurable risk by the long-term
studies
that actually correlated usage with risk. WiFi must be even safer.