Step 2: How much frequency is 0–18 GHz versus 0–50 GHz?

(Updated November 12)

Once I determined that DEW was not in the low GHz range (0–6 GHz) and was north of 6 GHz, I rented another probe that gauged 0–18 GHz (EF1891–3MHz-18GHz E Field (Flat) Probe for NBM Series, 0.8–1000V/m). The purpose was to isolate frequency above and below 18 GHz- to see which was more problematic (where the concentration of frequency was higher).

Again, I wanted to compare frequency ranges (Probe A measuring upto 18 Ghz versus Probe B measuring upto 50 GHz) to see if the frequency was likely 6–18 GHz or north of 18 GHz. My methodology is roughly the same as the initial analysis; in this case using a probe that measures upto 50 GHz and one probe upto 18 GHz and subtracting them.

Here is a sample reading:

Date: November 7, 2018

Time: 9:20 PM (the reason for the late time is that my DEW targeting is worst at night).

Trifield peak reading: 0.5 mW/m2

Narda 18 GHz peak reading: 2.6 mW/m2

Narda 50 GHz peak reading: 27 mW/m2

% of High Frequency between 18–50 GHz: 90.4%

What this shows is that the bulk of the frequency exposure comes from 18–50 GHz (and not below this frequency range). The total percentage of the frequency from under 18 GHz is 2.6 mW/m2 of a total of 27 mW/m2. That represents 9.6% of the total. 90.4% of the frequency is above 18 GHz; or 18 GHz to 50 GHz.

In consistent tests, the % of frequency from under 18 GHz was only 0.7–12% of the total, and averaging around 8% of the total. This means 92% of the frequency comes from 18 GHz-50 GHz. This test takes us further to gauging the actual range of DEW, by showing the 6–18 GHz range is less a primary suspect for DEW (just as we showed 0–6 GHz was not so problematic in the last test). Increasingly it appears the higher frequencies are where we should focus re: DEW.

The scientific world has terminology for these sub-ranges within the Radio Frequency EMF range:

From our tests, we showed Ultra High Frequency-UHF (300 MHz-3 GHz) was not a significant contributor to DEW. In this test, we showed that half of Super High Frequency-SHF (3 GHz-30 GHz) is not a strong contributor to DEW. We must focus on the upper range of SHF and in the Extremely High Frequency-EHF (30 GHz-300 GHz) range.

So here is that chart edited with where we should focus when it comes to DEW (note: I’ve eliminated the lower frequencies — 30 MHz and lower- because there is no scientific reason for low frequencies to be able to cause the pain/zapping sensation of DEW):

As you can see, the bulk of the likely DEW frequency is between 18–50 GHz. Perps don’t attack using only one frequency, but rather a range of frequencies that fall all over the spectrum; however, the concentration of that EMF blast appears to be above 18 GHz. This is important for many reasons. One simple example: most makers of RF tents, for example, only show their shielding properties upto 20 GHz. For example, see the shielding chart for Holland’s RF shielding tent:

Yet TI’s will want to know shielding properties above 20 GHz if they want to be protected from DEW. This is just one example why knowing the precise relevant range of DEW matters; it influences our shielding choices. And it helps focus our measurement efforts.

Slowly but surely, we are zeroing in on the DEW frequency; one step at a time. My next steps are to use a spectrum analysis to find the distribution of frequency concentration in this range (18–50 GHz); I also want to check if the DEW frequency is above 50 GHz (I don’t think this is likely and this poses challenges given the dearth of measuring equipment covering this range; nonetheless I will examine if possible).