Except the range on 5G is catastrophically low. The reason there are so many antennas they have quoted as to needing are because they are microcells.

The microcells are basically tiny cell towers that are mounted nearby to provide coverage. They do this seemlessly by switching from one to the other by providing a measured signal. The reason they have to measure this signal is because amplifying too much and you overload the antennas (think microphone feedback) and two, is because there is something called AGC which is automatic gain control.

Since signals tend to be mixed with ambient noise and sometimes need to be designed to cover a larger area we can essentially dial in the effectiveness of a particular antenna. Some of these MAY have beamforming to pinpoint accurately to a directed user, but this is not feasible when we are dealing with the amount of people that are currently using it, it will beam form slightly, but this is just directionality, and would be described as a directional antenna or LPDA type antenna.

The strength of cellular signal are quite low... in fact. The minimum signal requirement for your phone to be able to identify above the noise level is -115dB which if you're any good with math you'll no that the amount of energy is so low it can hardly do anything. Since we are dealing with EMF that uses waves/frequency to do this we measure the "loudness" of the signal, or amplitude, in Decibels. The frequency is the full waveform over time. Decibels are logarithmic, as you go up or down in value, you're changing by the same amount comparative to the original amount, let me explain.

(every 10dB change is +/-10x signal | 3.2dB = ~+/-2x signal) Signal A = -115dB = 0-1 Bar signal Signal B = -105dB = 2 Bar signal Signal C = -95dB = 3-4 Bar Signal Signal D = -65dB = 5 Bar signal The difference from A -> B is 10x LESS signal strength. The difference from A -> D = 10x10x10x10x10 Signal Strength = 100,000x stronger. I'm not kidding, but it also isn't that significant, because just as signal strength changes so fast, so does the area of which an antenna can broadcast without dissipating the entire signal into white noise.

This effect is called the inverse square law, essentially the further you go the further your signal goes down exponentially.

When we basically have no signal left at the end of service area, there is essentially 0 energy over ambient noise signal. Thing is, your cellphone has to send back signal to the cell tower, and trust me when I say this, your cellphone doesn't transmit much power. Many cell phones have two signal strengths: 0.6 watts and 3 watts, meant for different frequencies, low and hi band which is essentially 3G and 4G.

The new 5G signals ARE NOT ACTUAL 5G SIGNAL they are advertised for the namesake of 5G but are actually the same 4G signals but "upgraded" which is essentially none different than normal everyday life before 5G anyways. The new 5G is this higher frequency which means even lower range.

When frequencies get higher the more they are impacted to dissipation of energy over distance. Essentially increasing the likely hood of not getting signal. The trade-off is beneficial though, it allows more data to transfer faster.

When I see theories that try to use 5G as a "method" to explain their "theory" I get rather upset because it shows they only see this technology as some sort of potential "techno-magical" disaster. I'm not trying to discredit the use of it isn't nefarious, but it isn't mad scientist hour.

If anything 5G network is compromised or planned with backdoors that allow governments to eavesdrop on everything, since that is their only real desire is to control, not destroy per se.

Frequencies are also very percise, I've heard "what if they use the resonant frequency of (insert idea here). Well... our communications, to no one's surprise, is actually very simple, but complex. Let me show you: https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/2003-allochrt.pdf

That link will take you to the FCCs frequency allocation chart, showing EVERY type of approved communication, and what the reserved band (a range of frequency) is used for. Lower frequencies are meant for higher range low data so think ship communications and submarines and the like. The higher ones are more data focused, so cellular and WiFi and bluetooth and the like.

There are some frequencies that do affect other materials using the aforementioned "resonant" frequency which allows the transfer of energy more readily into the material it has a resonance with. This is very particular to the matter the object is made of, for instance microwave ovens use the resonant frequency of water to cook with, but that is a 1200W microwave at only 6 inches away, vs a 3W cell phone talking to a cell tower miles away. Whatever situation you're worried about is likely not even possible in most cases, because beamforming and the like is extremely complicated to send a beam to a specific target while hitting nothing else and not ricocheting to another target and so on.

The idea behind 5G should be skeptical, but think of it as a network please, and not a beam of energy meant to do nefarious psuedo-science doomsday devices. Cell towers only project 3W-500W of power, but over miles. That's only a lot of energy that can do harm IF...

The Target is ridiculously close range The signal is very accurately The Target is comprised of matter specifically chosen to be affected by the signal The Cell tower is used out of scope of what it can do (or microcell which uses even less power)

PLEASE take my words to heart, let's stop fantasizing of doomsday devices built into communication infrastructures... my only guess to it's nefarious use is by it's intended normal use of data communication, and it'll be more on the snooping/eavesdropping/tracking side of things.