The Electromagnetic Spectrum

c = λ ÷ ƒ . . . where c = speed of light, λ = wavelength and ƒ = frequency

Since c is a constant (6.7 million mph) . . . as λ (in meters or m) decreases, ƒ (in Hertz or Hz) increases, proportionally.

The types of electromagnetic radiation are broadly classified into the following classes (aka regions, bands or types). This classification goes in the decreasing order of wavelength (increasing order of frequency). There are no precisely defined boundaries between the bands of the electromagnetic spectrum; rather they fade into each other like the bands in a rainbow (which is the sub-spectrum of visible light). Radiation of each frequency and wavelength (or in each band) has a mix of properties of the two regions of the spectrum that bound it.

  1. Radio wave radiation
  2. Microwave radiation
  3. Infrared radiation
  4. Visible light radiation
  5. Ultraviolet radiation
  6. X-ray radiation
  7. Gamma-ray radiation

Pay particular attention to the first line in the chart, below, to recognize which frequencies actually penetrate the Earth’s atmosphere from outer space . . . only radio signals (ƒ = 103) and visible light (ƒ = 1012) make it through. The human body has adapted to the presence of only these and other naturally occurring frequencies — each at extremely low power levels.

The other parts of the Electomagnetic Spectrum, including RF-EMR (man-made, pulsed, data-modulated, Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation) — ƒ = 106 to 109 at extremely high power levels vs. biological levels. — is completely xenobiotic, or foreign to our biology. We have no natural defenses against RF-EMR signals from Wireless infrastructure and devices. No matter how much money corporations make from the backroom deals perpetrated by a fully-captured Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Big Telecom, one can’t bend the laws of physics or lie to one’s biology . . . we are at a tipping point, as evidenced here and here.

Nobel Prize Winner, Richard Feynman,
Spoke in 1966 re: What is Science?

Presented at the fifteenth annual meeting of the National Science Teachers Association, 1966 in New York City, and reprinted from The Physics Teacher Vol. 7, issue 6, 1969, pp. 313-320 by permission of the editor and the author.

I thank Mr. DeRose for the opportunity to join you science teachers. I also am a science teacher. I have much experience in teaching graduate students in physics, and as a result of the experience I know that I don’t know how to teach.

The subject “What Is Science” is not my choice. It was Mr. DeRose’s subject. But I would like to say that I think that “what is science” is not at all equivalent to “how to teach science.”

. . . What is science? Of course you all must know, if you teach it. That’s common sense. What can I say? If you don’t know, the teacher’s edition of nearly every textbook gives a complete discussion of the subject: some kind of distorted distillation of watered-down and mixed-up words of Francis Bacon from a few centuries ago, words which, then, were supposed to be the deep philosophy of science.

However, one of the greatest experimental scientists of the time who was really doing something, William Harvey, said that what Bacon said science was, was the science that a lord-chancellor would do. Bacon spoke of making observations, but omitted the vital factor of judgment about what to observe and to what to pay one’s attention.

And so what science is, is not what the philosophers have said it is, and certainly not what text book’s teacher editions say it is.

To explain this . . . I was reminded of a little poem:

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, “Pray, which leg comes after which?”
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch,
Not knowing how to run.

All my life, I have been doing science and have known what it was, but what I have come to tell you –which foot comes after which – I am unable to do, and furthermore, I am worried by the analogy in the poem that when I go home I will no longer be able to do any research.

There have been a lot of attempts by the various press reporters to get some kind of a capsule of this talk; I prepared it only a short time ago, so it was impossible; but I can see them all rushing out now to write some sort of headline which says: “The Professor called the President of National Science Teachers Association a toad.”

Under these circumstances regarding the difficulty of the subject, and understanding my dislike of philosophical exposition . . . I will try my best to answer the question: “What is science?”

The world looks so different after learning science. For example, trees are made of air, primarily. When they are burned, they go back to air, and in the flaming heat is released the flaming heat of the sun which was bound in to convert the air into tree, and in the ash is the small remnant of the part which did not come from air that came from the solid earth, instead. These are beautiful things, and the content of science is wonderfully full of them. They are very inspiring, and they can be used to inspire others.

Would you like this image as a poster, coffee mug or other item for your home or office? You can do so at

Science teaches the value of rational thought as well as the importance of freedom of thought; the positive results that come from doubting that what has been learned, to date, is true. You must distinguish between the forms or procedures used in developing science from the actual hypotheses, observations and decisions about whether or not the data collected supports the hypotheses. It is easy to say, “We write, experiment, and observe, and do this or that.” You can copy that form exactly. But that doesn’t always amount to reliable increases in knowledge.

Great religions are dissipated by following form without remembering the direct content of the teaching of the great leaders. In the same way, it is possible to follow form and call it science, but that is pseudo-science. In this way, we all suffer from the kind of tyranny we have today in the many institutions that have come under the influence of pseudoscientific advisers.”

Science, quite simply, is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

Scientists need to doubt that what is being passed from the past is in fact true, and to try to find out ab initio again from experience what the situation is, rather than trusting the experience of the past in the form in which it is passed down. And that is what science is: the result of the discovery that it is worthwhile rechecking by new direct experience, and not necessarily trusting the human race‘s experience from the past.

When someone says, “Science teaches such and such,” he is using the word incorrectly. Science doesn’t teach anything; experience teaches it. If they say to you, “Science has shown such and such,” you might ask, “How does science show it? How did the scientists find out? How? What? Where?”

It should not be “science has shown” but “this experiment, this effect, has shown.” And you have as much right as anyone else, upon hearing about the experiments – but be patient and listen to all the evidence – to judge whether a sensible conclusion has been arrived at.

True science is not yet able to get anywhere, so we have to rely on a kind of old-fashioned wisdom, a kind of definite straightforwardness because the experts who have been leading you, may, in fact, be wrong.I think we live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television – words, books, and so on – are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science.

Each generation that discovers something from its experience must pass that on, but it must pass that on with a delicate balance of respect and disrespect, so that the human race does not inflict its errors too rigidly on its youth, but it does pass on the accumulated wisdom, plus the wisdom that it may not be wisdom.

It is necessary to teach both to accept and to reject the past with a kind of balance that takes considerable skill. Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers of the preceding generation.

I. Physics/Engineering . . . All One Needs to Know for Sound Policy Decisions re: RF-EMR Power Levels

A. 4G Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR)
Frequencies & Wavelengths in the 4G World = 700 MHz to 2100 MHz
(This totals about 160 MHz/Carrier x 4 Carriers = ~640 MHz of Wireless Bandwidth)

B. Panoply of RF-EMR Frequencies & Wavelengths in the 4G + 5G World (Source: US Senate Bill 19: the Mobile Now Act)

2021 Resulting Wireless Bandwidth: about 1,850 MHz/Carrier × 3.5 Carriers = ~6,400 MHz, which is ~10x MORE . . . Likely Headed to 20x MORE by 2025!)

See examples of 100+ Channels of 2021 FCC RF-EMR Licenses for a single city here.

Frequency & Wavelengths Frequency & Wavelengths
5G: 600 MHz = waves 20 inches long 5G: 24,250 to 24,450 MHz = waves 0.5 inch long
4G: 700 MHz = waves 17 inches long 5G: 25,050 to 25,250 MHz = waves 0.5 inch long
4G: 800 MHz = waves 15 inches long 5G: 25,250 to 27,500 MHz = waves 0.4 inch long
4G: 900 MHz = waves 13 inches long 5G: 27,500 to 29,500 MHz = waves 0.4 inch long
4G: 1800 MHz = waves 7 inches long 5G:31,800 to 33,400 MHz = waves 0.4 inch long
4G: 2100 MHz = waves 6 inches long 5G: 37,000 to 40,000 MHz = waves 0.3 inch long
Wi-Fi: 2450 MHz = waves 5 inches long (unlicensed) 5G:: 42,000 to 42,500 MHz = waves 0.3 inch long
5G: 3100 MHz to 3550 MHz = waves 3.8 to 3.3 inches long 5G: 57,000 to 64,500 MHz = waves 0.3 inch long (unlicensed)
5G: 3550 MHz to 3700 MHz = waves 3.3 to 3.2 inches long 5G:64,000 to 71,000 MHz = waves 0.2 inch long
5G: 3700 MHz to 4200 MHz = waves 3.2 to 2.8 inches long 5G: 71,000 to 76,000 MHz = waves 0.2 inch long
5G: 4200 to 4900 MHz = waves 2.8 to 2.4 inches long 5G:: 81,000 to 86,000 MHz = waves 0.1 inch long
Wi-Fi: 5800 MHz = waves 2.0 inches long (unlicensed)  

C. What Frequencies Are U.S. Wireless Carriers Using for 4G+5G?

Let’s first divide the four major 5G players in the U.S. into three groups, depending upon the frequency band in which they operate for new 5G service. Those three groups would be low band, mid band and high, or mmWave, band.

Low-band 4G+5G Cell Service (600 MHz to 2,100 MHz)


  • Low-band 5G from T-Mobile at 600 MHz
  • Low-band 5G from AT&T at 850 MHz

The carriers are also installing 4G small Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) with antennas that are highly- modulated, LTE-Advanced™ technologies transmitting in the low-band. These antennas can be converted to 5G with a simple software upgrade, with no additional physical installation needed.

Specifically, Verizon will be using Dynamic Spectrum Sharing (DSS) on their 700 MHz and 850 MHz low-band frequencies to enable their 4G combination low- and mid-band antennas to switch seamlessly between 4G and 5G, depending upon demand. To transition from the existing 4G LTE-only radio core to a 4G+5G radio core, Verizon and other carriers are deploying the EUTRAN-NR Dual Connectivity (ENDC) — E-UTRAN is of course LTE, in everyday speak, and New Radio (NR) is the 5G radio network. This situation where both LTE and 5G NR cores can be used is called non-standalone, or NSA, protocol. It will be in place until such time as carriers build out a completely new 5G NR Core (5GC), called standalone, or SA protocol.

Mid-band 5G Cell Service (2,200 MHz to 5,900 MHz)


  • Mid-band 5G from Sprint at 2,500 MHz
  • Mid-band 5G Verizon (and other carriers) at 3,550 to 3,650 MHz

The FCC is auctioning more mid-band spectrum to all three carriers from the CBRS (Citizens Band Radio Spectrum) band, at 3.5 GHz, and C-band, currently used for satellite TV transmissions, at 3.7-4.2 GHz

The Carriers are also installing 4G small Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) with highly modulated, LTE-Advanced™ technologies transmitting in the mid-band that convert to 5G with software upgrades. As in the low band, Verizon will be using Dynamic Spectrum Sharing (DSS) to allow their low- and mid-band 4G transmitters to switch seamlessly between 4G and 5G, depending upon demand. As in the low-band, Verizon and other carriers are also using ENDC in the non-standalone mode in the mid-band to transition from the existing only 4G LTE-based radio core to add 5G NR, at existing macro cell sites and new small sWTF sites via a software update.

New Unlicensed WiFi Service, just above (5,900-7,100 MH)


The FCC is set to open up unlicensed 6,000 MHz to cell carriers and others for expanded public WiFi 6 coverage for next-generation devices. The FCC will auction spectrum between 5,900-7,100 MHz This will be additional unlicensed frequency, adding to existing unlicensed frequencies used for WiFi at 2.,400 MHz and 5,000-5,800 MHz, and by some router manufacturers at 60 GHz

High-band, mmWave 5G Cell Service (at 20,000-28,000 MHz and 39,000 MHz)
  • T-Mobile (very limited, if any)
  • AT&T (some business installations only at 24,000 MHz)
  • Verizon (consumer installations at 28,000 and 39,000 Mhz)

How Each Carrier Has Deployed 5G as of the End of 2020

  • T-Mobile (now merged with Sprint) provides low-band 5G coverage at 600 MHz to 200 million people. Any 4G/5G antenna transmitting below 2 GHz will not send its 5G signals with beam-forming. Click here for coverage map of T-Mobile’s nationwide low band 5G service Nationwide low band 5G service available on Samsung Galaxy Note10+ 5G and and One Plus 7T Pro 5G McLaren phones T-Mobile’s high band, mmWave 5G offerings are only available in limited dense urban areas of six cities: New York, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Dallas, Cleveland and Atlanta. Click here for coverage map of T-Mobile’s more limited mmWave 5G service T-Mobile’s mmWave 5G service is available on Samsung Galaxy S10 5G phones
  • Sprint (now merged with T-Mobile) provides mid-band “True Mobile” 5G service at 2,500 MHz in large areas within nine cities: Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Kansas City, Los Angeles, New York, Phoenix, and Washington, DC. These 5G massive MIMO antennas are currently only being installed at Sprint’s existing 4G LTE macro cell antenna sites. Spring is contemplating also installing 5G sWTF antennas in the future. Click here for more details about Sprint’s current mid-band 5G service. Available on LG V50 ThinQ, Samsung Galaxy S10 5G and HTC 5G Hub phones Sprint 5G customers will be required to turn on VoLTE (Voice over LTE) In addition to their mid band 5G service, Sprint has upgraded and added to their existing 4G LTE network (in the low and mid bands) to create their new “LTE-Advanced” network, discussed here. It reportedly provides 2X faster 4G service in cities throughout the U.S. on the list seen [here]( Advanced List.pdf) and on their national coverage map here. On their national map, which provides a great deal of street by street specificity, click the “+” in the upper left corner to zoom in. When the box, “Coverage depends on your device” comes up, choose “No thanks, show me all coverage”. Then click on “Legend” to see their cell coverage, including 5G and various types of 4G service.
  • AT&T provides low band “5G Evolution (5GE)” (i.e. 4G service falsely labeled as 5G) coverage to “over 500 markets”. Planning for nationwide coverage by first half of 2020. Low-band 5G service is available to all customers “Enabling faster speeds on our existing (4G) LTE network”. Click here and here for more details. Click here for a list of 26 phones that provide AT&T’s 5GE service AT&T also offers “5G+” mmWave service to business customers only, in limited locations within 25 cities. 5G+ mmWave service; plans are to expand to 35 cities by early 2020.
  • Verizon provides Ultra-Wideband 5G mmWave service on certain treets within limited dense urban areas in 31 cities. The company has also deployed limited 5G service in 16 NFL stadiums, with plans to cover all 32 by the end of 2021. Verizon also has some mid-band holdings at 3,550 to 3,650 MHz, and it is planning, along with all cell carriers, to bid on the new 3,500 MHz and 3,700-4,200 MHz spectrum coming up for auction in 2020. Click here for Verizon’s 5G service map. It does not give you the street by street specificity that 5G coverage maps do on other carrier’s websites. Verizon 5G service is available on Samsung Galaxy Note10+ 5G, LG V50 ThinQ 5G, Samsung Galaxy S10 5G and Motorola Moto Z4 phones. Verizon plans to provide 20 models with 5G capabilities in 2020

How Do the Three Frequency Bands Differ by Characteristics?


600 MHz to 2,000 MHz are the longest wavelengths (20 in., down to 12 in.) Currently used for 4G LTE and new 5G service (dubbed “Enhanced 4G” or “5G Lite” by industry) Moderately faster frequencies (meaning, faster data download speeds than existing 4G, increasing from 20-30 to 30-250 Megabits per second (Mbps), but slower than high, mmWave band 5G download speeds) Signals travel up to seven miles for 4G macro cell signals. New low-band 5G signals touted to cover “hundreds of miles” from a single tower (see here for reference) The spray of pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) signal coming out of 4G and 5G low-band antennas 120 degrees side to side and 30 degrees, top to bottom. Signals are always-on, bathing houses and urban areas with continuous RF-EMR signals, which can pass easily through walls, and deep into homes, commercial buildings and deep into people, as well. Low-band is easy to measure with currently available RF-EMR meters. Shielding is possible with paint, foil, window film & screen, and fabric, but difficult to execute well.


2,000 MHz to 6,000 MHz still have long wavelengths (12 in. down to 4 in.) and is currently used for 4G LTE and new 5G service that is dubbed “Enhanced 4G” or “5G Lite” by the Wireless industry. Moderately faster frequencies (meaning, faster data download speeds than existing 4G and low-band 5G, increasing to 100-900 Mbps, but still lower than high, mmWave band 5G download speeds). Signals still travel for miles. Signal plumes or cones are wide, up to 120 degrees side to side and top to bottom. 4G LTE signals are always-on, bathing neighborhoods with continuous RF. Can still pass easily through walls deep into homes and commercial buildings Beam-forming possible for 4G LTE-Advanced and mid band 5G service Also easy to measure with currently available RF meters Shielding is still possible with paint, foil, window film & screen, and fabric.

High-band, mmWave

Above 20 GHz, wavelengths are very short (one-half inch, or only several mm) Currently used for new 5G service only (no 4G service at these frequencies). Faster frequencies (meaning, fastest data download speeds, up to 1,000-3,000 Mbps) Signals travel up to 3,000 feet per Verizon, or about up to one square mile. Signals are beam-formed and narrow, 15-20 degrees wide. Signals are idle until sent out on-demand when requested by a mmWave 5G-enabled handheld device (or fixed wireless Internet Consumer Equipment Unit for Verizon’s Fixed Wireless Internet service — a service that virtually no one is buying in Sacramento.) High-band signals cannot easily pass through walls into homes and commercial buildings unless beam-formed, and even then, passage is difficult through walls Low-E glass. 5G hand-held device (cell phone) must be relatively stationary to stay connected. High-band 5G signals cannot be measured at all with currently available RF-EMR meters and shielding is not as easy. Only paint and foil (and Aaronia Silver Fabric) are expected to be effective.

D. Conclusion: 10-20x more Wireless Bandwidth = More Digital Data Carried on Waves = More Electromagnetic Power Through-the-Air = A Biological Disaster

II. Biology/Medical . . . All One Needs to Know for Sound Policy Decisions re: RF-EMR Power Levels

A. The Wireless Industry’s agenda for 5G is to deploy significantly more data bandwidth and higher data-rates than ever deployed in the entirety of human history.

This ill-advised plan would result in significantly more adverse bio-effects. Even worse, 4G/5G millimeter-wave RF-EMR (~20,000 to 40,000 MHz) is to be beam-formed and sprayed in 15-20 degree-wide beams, a deployment that approaches maser-like, directed-energy weapons (DEW). A maser is a microwave laser or microwave taser.

Pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) causes scientifically-established melatonin-suppression, immuno-suppression, and immediate/direct neurological damages, as well as other bio-effects — all which increase synergistically, not merely additively, with the increased complexity of many simultaneous wavelength deployments for 4G/5G antennas.

  • As a wavelength approaches body-part size, its absorption increases exponentially. Thus, microwaves, waves in the “size of life”, have been known for decades as the most bioactive and harmful RF-EMR. When a wavelength approximates a body dimension, resonance is achieved: the body part or whole body effectively becomes a concentrating antenna.
  • Similarly, this RF-EMR interferes with electronic medical devices. See Mobile Communications Safety pp. 65-94 — RF interference (RFI) of medical devices by mobile communications transmitters.
  • The ~20” waves (from 600 MHz T-Mobile 5G) penetrates deeply into human and animal bodies, maximizing harm in babies and small children.
  • The ~2” to 5” waves (from 2,450 MHz to 5,800 MHz Wi-Fi) target the primary organs: brain, heart, lungs, liver, thyroid, thymus, kidneys, genitalia, in humans and larger animals.
  • The 10 to 0.1 millimeter waves (from 30,000 MHz to 300,000 MHz) target the most critical organs of perception – eyes and ears – in addition to the body’s largest organ: the skin.
  • Resonating at the lengths of insect antennas, these mm microwaves can exterminate pollinating insects such as bees and butterflies , and birds and all other wildlife, as well.
  • Farm animals are immediately harmed by 4G/5G RF-EMR — Initially torturesome to all living beings by way of neurologic interference, and interference with hormonal control systems.

B. The Established Scientific Findings that PROVE Biological Harms from RF-EMR (at levels hundreds of thousands of times below the FCC RF-EMR Guideline) are Significant, Replicated and Deep

There are over 20,000 studies, since 1927 that establish that adverse Bio-Effects from pulsed, data-modulated, Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) is one of the most studied phenomena in history.

Science Sites
RF-EMR Breaks DNA (source)

The central question at the heart of the Vienna Affair is this:

Can RF-EMR, in general, and signals from cellular phone and infrastructure antennas in particular, damage DNA?

The answer depends on whom you ask. A typical Wireless Industry-funded response is ‘No, because the radiation lacks the quantum energy to break chemical bonds.’

But that is not the last word, because there are other ways to get the job done. Kundi told me in an e-mail last year:

“I believe that RF[-EMR] does not need to have sufficient energy to break chemical bonds in order to induce DNA damage and thereby cause cancer. The key to these effects is an interaction at the cell membrane that leads under certain circumstances to interruption of intracellular signal pathways. This causes interference with DNA repair which in turn leads to DNA damage. Furthermore, it can induce oxidative stress.”

Michael Kundi is the former head of the Medical University of Vienna’s Institute of Environmental Health and has published extensively on cell phone infrastructure and cancer. As the papers showing RF–induced DNA breaks mount up, Kundi’s assessment is becoming the dominant view.

It got a significant boost when the U.S. National Toxicology Program, NTP, reported seeing DNA breaks in some of the same animal tissues where tumors developed following RF exposure in its $30 million RF–cancer project.

Just a few days ago, on February 4th, Henry Lai —who was the first, with N.P. Singh, to show that non-ionizing radiation can break DNA 26 years ago— published an updated review on RF–genotoxicity in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. According to his latest count, as of January 2021, there have been 361 papers on the topic. Of these 237 (66%) reported effects and 124 (34%) did not.

Henry Lai, PhD Published This ReviewOnline on Feb 4, 2021

This is a review of the research on the genetic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic field (EMF), mainly on radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and static and extremely low frequency EMF (ELF-EMF). The majority of the studies are on genotoxicity (e.g., DNA damage, chromatin conformation changes, etc.) and gene expression. Genetic effects of EMF depend on various factors, including field parameters and characteristics (frequency, intensity, wave-shape), cell type, and exposure duration. The types of gene expression affected (e.g., genes involved in cell cycle arrest, apoptosis and stress responses, heat-shock proteins) are consistent with the findings that EMF causes genetic damages. Many studies reported effects in cells and animals after exposure to EMF at intensities similar to those in the public and occupational environments. Involvement of free radicals is a likely possibility. EMF also interacts synergistically with different entities on genetic functions. Interactions, particularly with chemotherapeutic compounds, raise the possibility of using EMF as an adjuvant for cancer treatment to increase the efficacy and decrease side effects of traditional chemotherapeutic drugs. Other data, such as adaptive effects and mitotic spindle aberrations after EMF exposure, further support the notion that EMF causes genetic effects in living organisms.

See also:

III. ADA/FHAA/Disability . . . All One Needs to Know for Sound Policy Decisions re: RF-EMR Power Levels