5G is on the way!

[pbrower2a]

As you can expect from someone my age (62), I am leery of technologies that allegedly can revolutionize society. I have seen it all since I was a kid back in the 1960s, and I usually recognize hype when I encounter it. Most innovative technologies have high costs (so that the creators can recover costs of development), so it is usually wise to be a late adapter, but not so late that one ends up with something no longer useful or adequate.  Being five years behind the times is fine, because you will end up with fifteen-year-old technology after ten years and hardly notice a thing until you start to see it get inadequate.

The "G" refers to generation and not to gigabytes, so it is not simply an increase in the level of information available. More information available? I have difficulty sifting through what there is now, and you can probably figure out quickly that I am no dummy. I just don/t like to pay big money for stuff that I can never understand. let alone use.

Quote:5G is coming, and it’s going to have a massive impact on almost every facet of how we use technology, with faster speeds and lower latency theoretically opening up huge new frontiers in everything from smartphones to self-driving cars.
But the future of mobile networks isn’t here yet. And with something as complex as 5G, dozens of companies, carriers, and device manufacturers all need to work together for this kind of rollout to happen. Here’s where everything stands right now, though:
We’re still in the early days of 5G, and news will accelerate as we get closer to networks rolling out and hardware releasing that support it. We’ll continue to update this post will all the new details, so check back often.



What is 5G?

On a basic level, 5G is the fifth generation of cellular networking. It’s what comes after our current 4G / LTE networks, much in the same way that LTE was a radical shift forward from 3G. Think of how much the way we used and interacted with our phones shifted when 3G data was first introduced, or how things changed again when high-speed LTE data came around. That’s the kind of change we’re looking at with 5G.

What is 5G?

But on a more technical level, “5G” is an agreed upon set of standards defined by the International Telecommunication Union (the ITU) and the 3GPP, who work together with hardware companies and carriers to define what exactly a 5G network actually is.
And over the past few months, we’ve actually reached two general definitions for those: the non-standalone 5G New Radio network, which (as the name implies) is built off of existing LTE networks and hardware, and standalone 5G NR networks, which allows for new deployments of 5G in places that didn’t necessarily have that existing infrastructure.

The first 5G standards are finally finished

The non-standalone standard was finished in December 2017, while the standalone standard was finalized in June 2018. Having extra time to work on it and being built on existing infrastructure means that when we do see the first real 5G networks start to roll out in 2019, they’ll likely be based on that first.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/7/178292...k-hardware

[pbrower2a]

The practical key to this technology is exploitation of the millimeter band of electromagnetic radiation:

Quote:The millimeter-wave region of the electromagnetic spectrum is usually considered to be the range of wavelengths from 10 millimeters (0.4 inches) to 1 millimeter (0.04 inches). This means millimeter waves are longer than infrared waves or x-rays, for example, but shorter than radio waves or microwaves. The millimeter-wave region of the electromagnetic spectrum corresponds to radio band frequencies of 30 GHz to 300 GHz and is sometimes called the Extremely High Frequency (EHF) range. The high frequency of millimeters waves as well as their propagation characteristics (that is, the ways they change or interact with the atmosphere as they travel) make them useful for a variety of applications including transmitting large amounts of computer data, cellular communications, and radar.

One of the greatest and most important uses of millimeter waves is in transmitting large amounts of data. Every kind of wireless communication, such as the radio, cell phone, or satellite, uses specific range of wavelengths or frequencies. Each application provider (such as a local television or radio broadcaster) has a unique “channel” assignment, so that they can all communicate at the same time without interfering with each other. These channels have “bandwidths” (also measured in either wavelength or frequency) that must be large enough to pass the information from the broadcaster’s transmitter to the user. For example, a telephone conversation requires only about 6 kHz of bandwidth, while a TV broadcast, which carries much larger amounts of information, requires about 6 MHz. (A kilohertz, is one thousand cycles per second; a megahertz is one million cycles per second). Increases in the amount of information transmitted require the use of higher frequencies. This is where millimeter waves come in. Their high frequency makes them a very efficient way of sending large amounts of data such as computer data, or many simultaneous television or voice channels.

Radar is another important use of millimeter waves, which takes advantage of another important property of millimeter wave propagation called beamwidth. Beamwidth is a measure of how a transmitted beam spreads out as it gets farther from its point of origin. In radar, it is desirable to have a beam that stays narrow, rather than fanning out. Small beamwidths are good in radar because they allow the radar to “see” small distant objects, much like a telescope. A carefully designed antenna allows microwaves to be focused into a narrow beam, just like a magnifying glass focuses sunlight Unfortunately, small beamwidths require large antenna sizes, which can make it difficult to design a good radar set that will fit, for example, inside a cramped airplane cockpit.

A radar sensor used in 2003-model Mercedes S-class automobiles. The circuits that transmit and receive millimeter waves are housed beneath the dome-shaped plastic "radome," which is about 10 cm (4 inches) in diameter. This unit is mounted behind a portion of the car's hood that is made to be transparent to millimeter-wave energy.

But the use of millimeter-length microwaves has allowed engineers to overcome this antenna problem. For a given antenna size, the beamwidth can be made smaller by increasing the frequency, and so the antenna can be made smaller as well. As an example, consider the collision-avoidance radar available in some cars. Specifications developed by auto manufacturers require this system to “see” a bicycle at a distance of 100 meters (330 feet). It must also distinguish the bicycle from other objects such as trees, bridges, roadside signs, and other moving vehicles. At a high frequency such a system uses an antenna approximately 10 cm (4 inches) in diameter, which automobile designers can tuck away behind the car’s grill or fender or design into the front end of the vehicle. At a lower frequency the diameter of the antenna required to achieve the same beamwidth would be 78 cm (31 inches), which would require a pretty silly looking antenna be mounted on the car.

Certain characteristics of the earth’s atmosphere pose both problems and solutions for millimeter wave applications. For example, at 60 GHz (5 mm or 0.2 inches wavelength) oxygen molecules will interact with electromagnetic radiation and absorb the energy. This means 60 GHz is not a good frequency for use in long-range radar or communications, because the oxygen absorbs the electromagnetic radiation—and the signal. On the other hand, since the 60 GHz signal does not travel far before it loses all its energy, this frequency comes in handy for secure short-range communications, such as local wireless area networks used for portable computers, where it is important that hackers do not tap into the data stream. Another use for 60 GHz technology is communications between satellites (called cross-linking) in high earth orbit. Since there is almost no oxygen in space at the geosynchronous altitudes of 43,000 km or 26,000 miles), 60 GHz works just fine for communication between satellites.

Although millimeter waves allow large bandwidth, other frequencies, such as infrared and optical wavelengths, allow the ultimate in high data rates and narrow beamwidths. Unlike millimeter waves, however, these shorter-wavelength signals suffer from absorption by fog, dust, and smoke. The solution, where applicable, is to use optical fiber as a wave guiding medium because it is not affected by fog or other atmospheric conditions. But there are still many situations where optical fibers cannot be used because the transmitters or receivers are mobile (such as cell phones or satellite communication) so radio-wave communications, including millimeter waves, is usually the best choice.

Milestone Recognition

IEEE have commemorated a milestone based on the early radio experimental work by Dr Jagadish Chandra Bose. His experiments in the early 1900's were conducted on equipment operating at 60GHz, approximately 5mm wavelength

https://ethw.org/Millimeter_Waves

[pbrower2a]

If this can be done economically for mobile communications, then it can also work for non-mobile communications such as broadcasting to fixed objects (like household radio, telephones, telephones, and computers). It could put land links for cable television and even the Internet onto the technological scrap-heap. Low cost of new and more functional technologies kills old technologies.

[David Horn]

(09-10-2018, 05:19 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: If this can be done economically for mobile communications, then it can also work for non-mobile communications such as broadcasting to fixed objects (like household radio, telephones, telephones, and computers). It could put land links for cable television and even the Internet onto the technological scrap-heap.  Low cost of new and more functional technologies kills old technologies.

Even though the analogy is a bit off, you might think of 5G as being more like the Wi-Fi service you get from your router than a phone service you get from the current network of towers.  5G will use small master stations, most of them located on short poles roughly every city block -- even closer as the technology fully matures.  The infrastructure will be individually cheap but massively expensive due to the shear number of locations that will be needed.  If you live in a city, you'll see this much sooner than you will in the suburbs. The exurbs and rural areas won't see 5G for a decade.

Once it's in place, it will support up to 1,000,000 nodes per square kilometer.  Nodes will be cellphones and similar smart devices, but the vast majority will be part of the Internet of Things.  Your car, for example, may consist of 10 to several hundred nodes communicating with other cars, the highway, your refrigerator at home (need more milk!) or finding you gasoline or a charging station.  Supporting old technology applications like video or phone service will be easy, and on-demand.  Eventually, everything will pass through these 5G networks, making them both useful providers and massive monopoly overlords.

If you think Facebook is excessively powerful, stand by for much worse.

[pbrower2a]

(09-10-2018, 10:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-10-2018, 05:19 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: If this can be done economically for mobile communications, then it can also work for non-mobile communications such as broadcasting to fixed objects (like household radio, telephones, telephones, and computers). It could put land links for cable television and even the Internet onto the technological scrap-heap.  Low cost of new and more functional technologies kills old technologies.

Even though the analogy is a bit off, you might think of 5G as being more like the Wi-Fi service you get from your router than a phone service you get from the current network of towers.  5G will use small master stations, most of them located on short poles roughly every city block -- even closer as the technology fully matures.  The infrastructure will be individually cheap but massively expensive due to the shear number of locations that will be needed.  If you live in a city, you'll see this much sooner than you will in the suburbs. The exurbs and rural areas won't see 5G for a decade.

Thanks for the qualification. Forecasts of technological availability are more justifiable for densely-populated, prosperous areas with young populations and unjustifiably rosy for places with thin population or a poor or elderly population.  If the technology is cheap on an individual basis (like that for a satellite dish?) then even a farm family might be able to afford a 5G 'mini-center'.  But this implies a qualification: the farm family would have to (1) afford it and (2) adopt it to get it. There will be plenty of nodes, including TV sets, cell phones, home-entertainment devices  (including the boom-boxes and video players). Government might subsidize 5R in impoverished areas  largely to offer educational access -- urban slums, Appalachia and the Ozarks, the Lower Rio Grande Valley, and Indian reservations.

Quote:Once it's in place, it will support up to 1,000,000 nodes per square kilometer.  Nodes will be cellphones and similar smart devices, but the vast majority will be part of the Internet of Things.  Your car, for example, may consist of 10 to several hundred nodes communicating with other cars, the highway, your refrigerator at home (need more milk!) or finding you gasoline or a charging station.  Supporting old technology applications like video or phone service will be easy, and on-demand.  Eventually, everything will pass through these 5G networks, making them both useful providers and massive monopoly overlords.

Also -- appliances including stoves and microwave ovens.

Quote:If you think Facebook is excessively powerful, stand by for much worse.

I have never known of any new technology without some questionable consequences.

[Eric the Green]

Acronymns, ugh ugh! Explain, define them please!

Google:

In telecommunication, Long-Term Evolution (LTE) is a standard for high-speed wireless communication for mobile devices and data terminals, based on the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSPA technologies. ... LTE is the upgrade path for carriers with both GSM/UMTS networks and CDMA2000 networks

Uh, now I understand (cough cough) (ugh ugh)

[Eric the Green]

Facebook may be powerful, but my use of it seems impotent. People do not change their minds as a result of what I write, any more than they do here, or anywhere else before. I don't notice much mind-shifting going on these days among anyone else either.

So what difference does it make how fast or how far we can communicate, if we can't communicate?

[pbrower2a]

(09-16-2018, 10:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Facebook may be powerful, but my use of it seems impotent. People do not change their minds as a result of what I write, any more than they do here, or anywhere else before. I don't notice much mind-shifting going on these days among anyone else either.

So what difference does it make how fast or how far we can communicate, if we can't communicate?

Trump's people and his Russian backers were initially successful in finding ways to exploit its potential for propaganda. But we are catching on. The propaganda faces diminishing returns as people find out that they have been taken if they did not reject it initially.

To achieve his agenda, Trump needs a near-dictatorship, which he is not getting.

[Galen]

(09-16-2018, 10:54 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: Facebook may be powerful, but my use of it seems impotent. People do not change their minds as a result of what I write, any more than they do here, or anywhere else before. I don't notice much mind-shifting going on these days among anyone else either.

So what difference does it make how fast or how far we can communicate, if we can't communicate?

Did it ever occur to you that people who read your writings consider you to be full of shit?

[David Horn]

(09-16-2018, 10:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Acronymns, ugh ugh!   Explain, define them please!

Google:

In telecommunication, Long-Term Evolution (LTE) is a standard for high-speed wireless communication for mobile devices and data terminals, based on the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSPA technologies. ... LTE is the upgrade path for carriers with both GSM/UMTS networks and CDMA2000 networks

Uh, now I understand (cough cough) (ugh ugh)

Translations:

• LTE: Long Term Evolution.  Prior to LTE, the many incompatible world standards were never going to merge
  
• GSM: Global Standard for Mobile.  This is the predominant world standard
  
• EDGE: Enhanced Data for GSM.  It's the data piece of GSM
  
• UMTS: Universal Mobile Telecommunications Standard.  This is a competitor to GSM, though the two have been normalized through LTE since 3G/4G
  
• HSPA: High Speed Packet Access. It's the data piece of UMTS
  
• CDMA2000: Code Division Multiple Access.  This is a Qualcomm standard used almost exclusively by Verizon, and the most difficult to normalize (thanks Verizon).
  

If this seems difficult, the entire subject is difficult.  Unlike Europe, we allowed private industry to make standards, and now we have to fix what they broke.  Guess who pays!

BTW, many if not most 4G/LTE phones will not work on 5G networks at all, though the 4G networks will continue to operate "for some time", whatever that means.  Assume a windfall for Apple and Samsung.  A lot depends on how the GMS/UMTS and CDMA2000 standards are merged at 5G, which is still not completely known.

[David Horn]

(09-21-2018, 03:58 AM)Galen Wrote:

(09-16-2018, 10:54 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: Facebook may be powerful, but my use of it seems impotent. People do not change their minds as a result of what I write, any more than they do here, or anywhere else before. I don't notice much mind-shifting going on these days among anyone else either.

So what difference does it make how fast or how far we can communicate, if we can't communicate?

Did it ever occur to you that people who read your writings consider you to be full of shit?

Did you ever consider the same?

[pbrower2a]

(09-21-2018, 03:58 AM)Galen Wrote:

(09-16-2018, 10:54 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: Facebook may be powerful, but my use of it seems impotent. People do not change their minds as a result of what I write, any more than they do here, or anywhere else before. I don't notice much mind-shifting going on these days among anyone else either.

So what difference does it make how fast or how far we can communicate, if we can't communicate?

Did it ever occur to you that people who read your writings consider you to be full of (vile word redacted)?

Consider yourself reported.

[Galen]

(09-21-2018, 01:49 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-21-2018, 03:58 AM)Galen Wrote:

(09-16-2018, 10:54 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: Facebook may be powerful, but my use of it seems impotent. People do not change their minds as a result of what I write, any more than they do here, or anywhere else before. I don't notice much mind-shifting going on these days among anyone else either.

So what difference does it make how fast or how far we can communicate, if we can't communicate?

Did it ever occur to you that people who read your writings consider you to be full of (vile word redacted)?

Consider yourself reported.

Oh the horror! What will I do?

[Galen]

(09-21-2018, 09:33 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-21-2018, 03:58 AM)Galen Wrote:

(09-16-2018, 10:54 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: Facebook may be powerful, but my use of it seems impotent. People do not change their minds as a result of what I write, any more than they do here, or anywhere else before. I don't notice much mind-shifting going on these days among anyone else either.

So what difference does it make how fast or how far we can communicate, if we can't communicate?

Did it ever occur to you that people who read your writings consider you to be full of shit?

Did you ever consider the same?

You are forgetting that Eric the Obtuse has a knowledge of science equal to that of the seventeenth century when Astrology was state of the art.  That and he still thinks socialism can work which indicates his contact with reality is sporadic at best.

[David Horn]

(09-22-2018, 02:59 AM)Galen Wrote: You are forgetting that Eric the Obtuse has a knowledge of science equal to that of the seventeenth century when Astrology was state of the art.  That and he still thinks socialism can work which indicates his contact with reality is sporadic at best.

Two things:

• Eric isn't unknowledgeable about science, merely skeptical about its expansiveness
  
• Socialism may work.  Capitalism, on the other hand, has run its course.
  

[pbrower2a]

(09-22-2018, 02:59 AM)Galen Wrote: You are forgetting that Eric the (Green) has a knowledge of science equal to that of the seventeenth century when Astrology was state of the art.  That and he still thinks socialism can work which indicates his contact with reality is sporadic at best.

Social-market system. Pure capitalism, the inhuman form in which the vast majority of people must suffer for the gain, indulgence, and power of a minuscule portion of Humanity, is morally reprehensible and incompatible with democracy and humanism. A social market system melds the incentives of capitalism with respect for the most vulnerable among us. The current manifestation of capitalism under Donald Trump basically kicks people when they are down and keeps shoving people down to be kicked even more.

Eric seems to have a rigorous respect for science. He applies that rigor to astrology, which is not science. If anyone could make astrology work it is he.

[Galen]

(09-22-2018, 02:59 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-22-2018, 02:59 AM)Galen Wrote: You are forgetting that Eric the Obtuse has a knowledge of science equal to that of the seventeenth century when Astrology was state of the art.  That and he still thinks socialism can work which indicates his contact with reality is sporadic at best.

Two things:

• Eric isn't unknowledgeable about science, merely skeptical about its expansiveness
  
• Socialism may work.  Capitalism, on the other hand, has run its course.
  

You are wrong about this but you can't understand why.  Why is it that every time socialism has been tried it has failed badly every time.  You would do well to consider what Rothbard had to say about Egalitarianism.  Come to think of it what Mises had to say about Socialism might me of some value.

Eric the Obtuse is an idiot and always has been.  Socialism can not and will not ever work for the simple reason that central planning in any form can not work.  The death of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact should have taught you that.  If the current experience of Venezuela can't teach you that then you truly are too stupid to live.

[Galen]

(09-22-2018, 03:59 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Eric seems to have a rigorous respect for science. He applies that rigor to astrology, which is not science. If anyone could make astrology work it is he.

The fact that he still tries after all of these centuries with plenty of evidence to the contrary tells any thinking person everything they need to know.

[pbrower2a]

(09-24-2018, 03:58 AM)Galen Wrote:

(09-22-2018, 02:59 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-22-2018, 02:59 AM)Galen Wrote: You are forgetting that Eric the Obtuse has a knowledge of science equal to that of the seventeenth century when Astrology was state of the art.  That and he still thinks socialism can work which indicates his contact with reality is sporadic at best.

Two things:

• Eric isn't unknowledgeable about science, merely skeptical about its expansiveness
  
• Socialism may work.  Capitalism, on the other hand, has run its course.
  

You are wrong about this but you can't understand why.  Why is it that every time socialism has been tried it has failed badly every time.  You would do well to consider what Rothbard had to say about Egalitarianism.  Come to think of it what Mises had to say about Socialism might me of some value.

Eric the Obtuse is an idiot and always has been.  Socialism can not and will not ever work for the simple reason that central planning in any form can not work.  The death of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact should have taught you that.  If the current experience of Venezuela can't teach you that then you truly are too stupid to live.

What does this ideological drivel have to do with 5G wireless telephony?

Extreme inegalitarianism is a barrier to technological and intellectual progress. It implies that nobody can buy innovative products .

[David Horn]

(09-24-2018, 03:58 AM)Galen Wrote: You are wrong about this but you can't understand why.  Why is it that every time socialism has been tried it has failed badly every time.  You would do well to consider what Rothbard had to say about Egalitarianism.  Come to think of it what Mises had to say about Socialism might me of some value.

Eric the Obtuse is an idiot and always has been.  Socialism can not and will not ever work for the simple reason that central planning in any form can not work.  The death of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact should have taught you that.  If the current experience of Venezuela can't teach you that then you truly are too stupid to live.

Why do you libertarian types equate socialism (ownership of the means of production by the workers themselves) with communism (central ownership and planning).  Essentially, they are as similar as beer and gasoline.  Capitalism, on the other hand, makes no allowance for distribution outside the ownership class.  As jobs are replaced by machines, and all business receipts are held for the owners, how do the prior workers eat, to say nothing of buying all the goods and services capitalist enterprise creates?  Since you foreswear all communal methods to distribute outside your narrow structure, capitalism just dies.

Note: socialism as I stated it is the most extreme version.  Most neo-socialists prefer a mixed but well regulated economy.