Help needed re: Outdoor (WiMax? WiFi?) Internet

> Hello all,
>
> I'm back from spending a week on a rural property in my trailer.
>
> As far as RF radiation at that place is concerned, I'm in a quandary about
> what to do.
>
> The property is rural, but not extremely far away from the nearest city,
> perhaps some 10 kilometers (6.21 miles).
>
> I don't see any cell phone antennas anywhere near the property; there is
> one visible tower of some sort, with red blinking lights, but everyone says
> it's only to warn aircraft, and I don't see antennas on it, nor do my meters
> register anything when I point them at it.  People have to drive way up the
> hill on the property (it's a large bit of land, over 100 acres) to get
> cellphone reception.  I don't pick up cell phone noise on my meters anywhere
> that I've checked.
>
> *However* - the people on this property get their internet through Bell (I
> believe).  They have two small, white, vertically oriented antennas (like
> mini cell tower antennas) on their property, one on the roof of their house,
> and on on the outer wall near the roof of the other main building that
> functions as an office and meeting space.  The antennas are pointed South,
> though the main city nearby is more like South-West.  Each antenna has a
> blue Ethernet cable running from it, into conduit, which goes into the
> building to which the antenna is attached.  It's through that Ethernet cable
> that they get their internet.
>
> Unfortunately, the antennas, though they are receivers, also act as
> transmitters; my RF meter picks up noise from them 100+ feet away, in the
> range of 800 to 2500 MHz and gets louder as I walk closer to the antennas.
>  They seem to only transmit (or "spill") this RF out of the "business end"
> (the flat side facing South) and out of the edge of their rectangular body.
>  Behind them, even close, there is *relatively* little noise.
>
> Now, we found a place to park my trailer where noise from these antennas
> doesn't register, and that's great.  But I'm concerned, and here's where I
> could use your advice.  Since these people are getting their internet
> service wirelessly, does that mean that the wireless internet signal (WiFi?
> WiMax?) is all around the property? Or is it coming in a more-or-less
> "straight line" from somewhere South of the property (which is the direction
> in which these two antennas are oriented)?
>
> Remember: Once I'm out of range of those antennas, I don't measure noise on
> my RF meters.  (I can measure down from 27 MHz up to 6000 MHz (6 Gigahertz).
>  The noise from the antennas is in the range of 800 to 2500 MHz.  Can I
> infer from this fact that the *transmitted* signal which this antennas are
> *receiving* is the same frequency, and perhaps the antennas just act as
> high powered amplifiers with only a local effect?
>
> Or do such internet services transmit at frequencies other than which I
> would pick up from the antennas at close range?
>
> When I walk around the property with my *really* sensitive RF meter that
> goes down to 27 MHz, I do get a number on the display, but there is no
> noise, only the sound of static.  This meter is so sensitive that I haven't
> seen anywhere that it doesn't pick something up the other ones register as
> "zero".
>
> When I do a search on Industry Canada's Spectrum Management site (which
> lists all transmitters and their frequencies within a set distance from any
> defined location), I unfortunately see that there are some transmitters in
> the nearby city that are owned by telecoms like Bell, Rogers and Telus that
> are listed as being *above* 6000 MHz (which is the upper limit of what my
> meters can measure).
>
> I don't know if *these *are reaching the property, or if only the
> frequencies I'm picking up between 800 MHz and 2.5 GHz at the antennas are
> reaching the property and are so weak that they're amplified by the antennas
> and nowhere else.
>
> I you could all help out I'd really appreciate it.
>
> Thanks!
>
> R.
>

> **
>
>
> Hi R.
>
>
> > The property is rural, but not extremely far away from the nearest city,
> > perhaps some 10 kilometers (6.21 miles).
> >
>
> > I don't pick up cell phone noise on my meters anywhere
> > that I've checked.
> >
>
> Sounds good. I would still be wary about the one tower, and seek to know
> what it's purpose is.
>
>
> > The antennas are pointed South,
> >
> Toward a service provider
>
>
> > It's through that Ethernet cable
> > that they get their internet.
> >
> Well you should be able to pick up those emissions when they are online.
>
>
> > Behind them, even close, there is *relatively* little noise.
> >
> Right, they are directional antennas.
>
>
> > Now, we found a place to park my trailer where noise from these antennas
> > doesn't register, and that's great. But I'm concerned, and here's where I
> > could use your advice. Since these people are getting their internet
> > service wirelessly, does that mean that the wireless internet signal
> (WiFi?
> > WiMax?) is all around the property?
>
> In small amounts, Yes. If you were to theoretically put up your own
> antenna, and point it south, you could receive internet transmissions
> too. The question is whether or not signals of tiny amplitude are strong
> enough to cause harm.
> In my experience, then answer can be yes, for the most sensitive people.
> I feel better where my meters show "background levels" as in a very very
> rural area.
> And I feel WiFi out where the signals are weak, so it looks more and
> more like the quantum, or call it scalar-waves or longitudinal-waves are
> more of a factor in how "information-carrying radio waves" can trigger a
> response in people.
>
>
> > Or is it coming in a more-or-less
> > "straight line" from somewhere South of the property (which is the
> direction
> > in which these two antennas are oriented)?
> >
> The source is straight line, but there will be uncountable reflections
> to account for, thus resulting in the signal being all around as well,
> but in lesser amplitudes.
>
>
> > Remember: Once I'm out of range of those antennas, I don't measure noise
> on
> > my RF meters.
> That is a good sign, although not completely exclusive.
>
>
> > (I can measure down from 27 MHz up to 6000 MHz (6 Gigahertz).
> >
> May I ask which meter?
>
>
> > The noise from the antennas is in the range of 800 to 2500 MHz.
> That is good to know.
>
>
> > Can I
> > infer from this fact that the *transmitted* signal which this antennas
> are *
> > receiving* is the same frequency, and perhaps the antennas just act as
> high
> > powered amplifiers with only a local effect?
> >
> No, not the exact same frequency, but I would say they Respond on the
> same frequency band, at a uplink frequency, whereas the signal from the
> South is a downlink frequency, usually only 10 or 20 Mhz apart.
>
> The antennas should not amplify the incoming signal anywhere but onto
> that blue cable.
>
>
> > Or do such internet services transmit at frequencies other than which I
> > would pick up from the antennas at close range?
> >
> >
> If the meter is good enough, I would say not for the ground based antennas.
> There are of course back-haul frequencies up in the multi Gigahertz
> range, tower to tower, and satellite to ground to satellite to think about.
>
>
> > When I walk around the property with my *really* sensitive RF meter that
> > goes down to 27 MHz, I do get a number on the display, but there is no
> > noise, only the sound of static. This meter is so sensitive that I
> haven't
> > seen anywhere that it doesn't pick something up the other ones register
> as
> > "zero".
> >
> Bathed in EMR everywhere nowadays.
>
>
> > When I do a search on Industry Canada's Spectrum Management site (which
> > lists all transmitters and their frequencies within a set distance from
> any
> > defined location), I unfortunately see that there are some transmitters
> in
> > the nearby city that are owned by telecoms like Bell, Rogers and Telus
> that
> > are listed as being *above* 6000 MHz (which is the upper limit of what my
> > meters can measure).
> >
> Those would be the point-to-point microwave back-haul mentioned above.
> Oh, don't forget everybody's backyard satellite dish are not in the
> database.
>
>
> > I don't know if *these *are reaching the property, or if only the
> > frequencies I'm picking up between 800 MHz and 2.5 GHz at the antennas
> are
> > reaching the property and are so weak that they're amplified by the
> antennas
> > and nowhere else.
> >
> Maybe they really are transmitting.
>
>
> > I you could all help out I'd really appreciate it.
> >
> >
>
> Stewart
> http://seahorseCorral.org/ehs1.html
>
>  
>

> **
>
>
> Article One wrote:
> > Thanks for responding!
> >
> Sorry I was a bit late, as I didn't feel like going online.
>
>
> > transmitting the signal at 3.5 GHz.
>
> I have seen transmissions at that frequency on the Spectran.
>
>
> > they call it a "modem"
>
> I agree.
>
>
> > it works in a line-of-sight, straight-line fashion.
> >
> Yes, but they are not concerned with any spill-over.
> It is not a laser beam.
>
>
> > with the ultra broadband isotropic antenna it goes down to 27 MHz
> >
> Ah, ok, nice.
>
>
> > that goes that high (plus I'd probably scare the pants off myself).
> >
> :)
> Gotta wonder.
>
>
> > Fortunately, there don't seem to be any normal towers visible to the
> naked
> > eye in the area of this property, save for the one which appears to have
> no
> > antennas, and another one *waaaay* off in the distance somewhere.
> >
> >
> That is good, or at least better than other places.
>
>
> > Another question, if you don't mind responding to it: The property owner
> > seemed (I hope he still is) amenable to me creating a partial metal
> shield
> > to mount around the outdoor modem which receives the signal which would
> have
> > an opening for the modem's business-end to receive the signal, but could
> > prevent all that RF from spilling out the sides.
> >
> >
> Sounds like an idea. I would need to see a picture of what you've got
> before really commenting.
>
> Is this up in the air, or on the side of a building?
>
> Stewart
>
>  
>