Google Is Building A 100kW Radio Transmitter At A Spaceport And No One Knows Why

You can find the funniest things in public government documents. There’s always ample evidence your local congress critter is working against the interests of their constituency, nation, and industry controlled by the commission they’re chairperson of. Rarely, though, do you find something surprising, and rarer still does it portend some sort of experiments conducted by Google at a spaceport in New Mexico.

In a publication released last week, Google asked the FCC to treat some information relating to radio experiments as confidential. These experiments involve highly directional and therefore high power transmissions at 2.5 GHz, 5.8GHz, 24GHz, 71-76GHz, and 81-86GHz. These experiments will take place at Spaceport America, a 12,000 foot runway in the middle of New Mexico occasionally used by SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, and now Google.

For the most part, this document only tells the FCC that Google won’t be causing harmful interference in their radio experiments. There few other details, save for what bands and transmitters Google will be using and an experimental radio license call sign (WI9XZE) that doesn’t show up in the FCC database.

Of the few details listed in the documents, one thing does pop out as exceptionally odd: a 70-80 GHz transmitter with an effective radiated power (ERP) 96,411 W. That’s close enough to 100 kilowatts to call it as such. This is the maximum effective radiated power of the highest power FM stations in the US, but radio stations are omnidirectional, whereas Google is using very high gain antennas with a beam width of less than half a degree. The actual power output of this transmitter is a mere half watt.

The best guess for what Google is doing out in the New Mexico desert is Project Skybender, a project to use millimeter waves to bring faster Internet to everyone. There aren’t many details, but there is a lot of speculation ranging from application in low Earth orbit to something with Google Loon.

152 thoughts on “Google Is Building A 100kW Radio Transmitter At A Spaceport And No One Knows Why

  1. arent the higher frequencies harmful to flesh? If they are experimenting in the 70-80ghz range at those power levels, they should be able to cook a chicken 1/2 a mile away……. Just speculating here. Just wondering.

    1. ERP stands for Effective Radiated Power and is the power level of a transmitter with an antenna gain of 0dB (and 0dB losses in the feeders etc). It does not mean the real power in the transmitted signal.
      Thus 1 W transmitter and 3dB gain antenna – ERP 3dB wrt 1W. The 3dB gain of the antenna simply means that the radiated power is greater in some directions and less in other directions – overall what comes out of the antenna is the transmitter power fed into it, it’s just that most of the transmitter power goes in one direction rather than another.
      Any system that uses antenna gain is usually doing it because the operator wants to restrict the radiated power to certain directions rather than another. An alternative is to have a non-directional antenna which broadcasts all around at equal strength, in which case you need a more powerful transmitter compared to a directional antenna.

      1. Oops, should have typed: –
        ERP stands for Effective Radiated Power and is the power level of a transmitter with an antenna gain of 0dB (and 0dB losses in the feeders etc) which provides the same signal strength in all directions as the ‘transmitter + antenna with gain’ does in its most favourable direction.
        It’s basically saying that a hosepipe with a flow of X litres/min and a narrow jet will provide X litres/min over a small area, a sprinkler system would have to have a very high flow rate to provide the same X litres/min per second over a large area.

        1. That’s EIRP, actually. Effective Isotropic Radiated Power. ERP is with respect to a dipole. Of course, the difference between those is just “the gain of a dipole,” which is 2.15 dBi.

          Of course, all of that makes you wonder “why the hell do you need 2 measures that are identical, other than being offset by 2.15 dBi?”

          1. Because it’s typically more convenient for lower frequency (ironically, that’s HF and VHF) antennas to be compared to dipoles, and for waveguides, dishes and other antennas suited for higher (UHF and beyond) frequencies to use dBi.

          2. Because while a true isotropic antenna does not actually exist, a dipole does. You can build a dipole and verify your measurements, but not an isotropic antenna. One makes the math easier, one makes practical verification easier. Take your pick which one you want to use given your needs, since as you say we know the conversion and can switch back and forth pretty easily to suit the situation.

          3. Over 100 comments now on this HaD post and not ONE person has pointed that one or more of the numbers in the Google specification is or are WRONG:

            10*log(96,411 W) = 49.84 dBd

            10^(52 dBd/10) = 158,489 W

            Obviously 52dBd ERP and 49.84 dBd ERP do not match.

            ERP is a confusing measure that is an old hold-over from the U.S. broadcasting industry. ERP is the effective radiated power compared with a dipole antenna and is expressed in dBd. A dipole has a gain of 2.15 dB compared with an isotropic radiator. EIRP is expressed in dBi. Both ERP and EIRP represent the transmitter power, plus the antenna gain, minus any losses between the transmitter and antenna flange or connector.

          4. Drone,
            52 dBW (=158 kW) EIRP is the same as 96 411W (=49.84 dBW) ERP, exactly as the document claims, the difference being that 2.15 dB dipole gain, as others (and even yourself) have already pointed out.

            What you wrote ( “10*log(96,411 W) = 49.84 dBd” ) is nonsense. dBd is NOT a unit of power measurement — it is simply a ratio or gain, and you failed to give a reference power, so “49.84 dBd” cannot be equated to watts. If you wrote “49.84 dBd Watts” then it would make more sense.

        2. ERP (Effective Radiated Power) is the power measured after the antenna, not the power input TO the antenna. So, antenna gain is part of the calculation, meaning it isn’t a 10kW radio, the way most people think of it.

          ERP = Ptx + Gant – Lfeed (Tx Power + Antenna Gain – Feedline loss)

          FCC explains it all here:

          It seems to be a bunch of 24W radios. Maybe with a high gain antenna. Or a bunch of them into a combiner and a high gain antenna.

      2. and, the benefit of these microwave frequencies is that you can build antennas with phenominal gain. Because the physical wavelength is small, you can scale a constructed antenna way up and still not have something with unmanageable size. Down in the broadcast bands, there’s a very real upward limit on antenna gain due to the volume of materials required (weight, size, shape, etc…), though radiated energy will travel farther. Up in the microwave bands and higher, physical materials are nowhere near needing such massive volumes (weight, size, shape, etc…) and so you can scale harder (though a higher degree of precision is required). The trade-off there is that the radiated energy doesn’t travel as far, proportionally, as in the broadcast bans. But, there’s also far less interference, so the relative distance increases.

        So many trade-offs to consider, but all-in-all, they can do a lot in terms of transmit/receive antennas for comparatively little.

        Of course, the complexity and precision of building the transmitter itself is another story entirely…

        1. Also, the directionality can be controlled to much tighter tolerances in the microwave bands… antennas with crazy gains have equivalently narrower beamwidths, thus are increasingly more directional.

    2. I know 2.45 GHz is bad for the moisture (i.e. water) in your body (and maybe your CNS too) and 95 GHz is very bad for the 1st few layers of your skin (at high power). US Mil uses it for the ADS crowd control system. I heard that a Dr. Koivisto recently found cognitive problems with humans in a 902 MHz field.

      1. It’s not “bad”, it’s just a band where water molecules will absorb the energy and convert it to heat.

        And there’s always some “doctor” claiming some disease is caused by RF. Usually they’re selling something.

        1. pelrun – What I meant by “bad” is you would not want to bypass your Microwave Oven’s safety switch and stick your hand in there during transmission. Your first clue would be your vitreous humour (eye-juice) cooking like an egg. That’s why they put the switch there in the first place. Some crazy people (mostly in Russia) think it’s funny to use them as a D.E. weapon in a “bad” way.

          Dr. Bryan D. Koivisto PHd is a scientist professor at Ryerson U in Canada (obviously not an American Liberal?). I don’t think he is selling anything except “education” that the cell phone industry wants you to buy into their propaganda. Only a stockholder or stake holder would defend the cell phone industry’s obvious EMF-fraud (i.e. 902 MHz still in use). I guess you don’t believe in GW caused by humans, tobacco is unsafe, oil is our safe-future, there is no such a thing as safe-coal, etc. To use a crude American right-wing pejorative: Don’t drink the Kool-Aid.

          1. I immediately have a problem with the conclusions of any organisation whose entire mission statement is based around the idea they have subsequently “proved”. There’s going to be a strong desire to not invalidate their own existence.

          2. The Bioinitiative Reports are pure and unadulterated rubbish that have been thoroughly debunked on several occasions, and by a number of science-based critics. To make a long story short, the quality of the underlying research is extremely poor and in some cases references papers had been previously withdrawn by their own authors. While this is not the forum to re-hash this debate, I do encourage anyone with an interest in this matter to dig a bit deeper, as the conclusions drawn by these metastudies are not supportable by fact.

    3. That inverse square law works pretty darn good. At one time I worked directly beneath a 1.62MW UHF antenna. (260 feet up) Field strength in building was actually considerably lower than with 914KW ERP standby antenna that was mounted lower but was 70 yards away.
      2.4GHz is actually more effective for cooking chickens. Natural ressonance for hydrocarbons. Which is why microwave ovens o0perate at 2.445GHz

      1. “2.4GHz is actually more effective for cooking chickens. Natural ressonance for hydrocarbons. Which is why microwave ovens o0perate at 2.445GHz”
        Please do not propagate this myth. It’s simply incorrect.

          1. WARNING: That’s an excellent primer to the topic. Unfortunately, the Word .doc file on that page is infected with a trojan. If your security isn’t up to date, avoid downloading the file.

          2. Dave said “You only need to operate at some harmonic of the resonant frequency for dielectric heating to work.”

            No, that’s incorrect, misleading and displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the physics involved. Resonant frequency has little to do with absorption. What’s more important is the loss tangent.

        1. Could you just summarise, how does a microwave oven cook food? Is it just like if you piped 800W of any old RF energy into something? Which is resistive heating, right? The food absorbs the RF energy, which induces a current, and that makes the heat?

          Put it in a nutshell with no Word trojans, please, surely it’s not that complicated.

          1. It’s not resistive heating. There’s some electric current, but it’s generally not a significant source of heating unless the water is very conductive with ions (e.g. salt). The dominant heating mechanism is the dielectric loss: The electric field of the incident RF energy makes the molecules wiggle. They can’t quite keep up, so they rotate or oscillate a little bit lagged behind the driving field, as they bump into each other trying to move to follow the field. That lag represents a loss mechanism, and conversion of the electric field energy into random kinetic energy of the molecules, which is heat. The amount they lag behind the driving field determined how much heating goes on, and is called the dielectric loss tangent. A good dielectric (say, mica) has a very low loss tangent. Liquid water (for example) has a relatively high loss tangent. Frozen water has a very low loss tangent, so does not get heated much in a microwave oven.

            Much more detail (and more formal approach) is on the page i mentioned above

          2. I have no idea what a “Word trojan” is but here is a very simplistic layman’s explanation by Dr. Louis Bloomfield PhD – Professor of Physics at the University of Virginia. I too incorrectly thought it was water resonance:

            It’s a common misconception that the microwaves in a microwave oven excite a natural resonance in water. The frequency of a microwave oven is well below any natural resonance in an isolated water molecule, and in liquid water those resonances are so smeared out that they’re barely noticeable anyway. It’s kind of like playing a violin under water—the strings won’t emit well-defined tones in water because the water impedes their vibrations. Similarly, water molecules don’t emit (or absorb) well-defined tones in liquid water because their clinging neighbors impede their vibrations.

            Instead of trying to interact through a natural resonance in water, a microwave oven just exposes the water molecules to the intense electromagnetic fields in strong, non-resonant microwaves. The frequency used in microwave ovens (2,450,000,000 cycles per second or 2.45 GHz) is a sensible but not unique choice. Waves of that frequency penetrate well into foods of reasonable size so that the heating is relatively uniform throughout the foods. Since leakage from these ovens makes the radio spectrum near 2.45 GHz unusable for communications, the frequency was chosen in part because it would not interfere with existing communication systems.

      2. The main reason is wavelength and penetration/absorption depth. Higher frequencies would penetrate less, only the outside would be cooked. Lower frequencies are absorbed less. There is NO RESONANT absorption.

    4. i fear you are correct 96kw with a half a degree beam width at 80 ghz seems like a rifle to me from 10-15 feet away you could cook individual organs like the heart or eyes in fairly short order……

      1. EME wifi would be cool but speed of light lag already causes protocol timeouts in under 100km if I remember correctly, which is why we need legal change to allow for stuff like FOSS SDR wifi firmware and more open hardware so everyone on ISM freqs and licensed radio amateurs on their freqs can hack around with things for unusual applications. I understand that using a very low bandwidth protocol like JT65 on 2m or 70cm with a DIY yaggi you can do EME echo tests under 100w. The catch is the data speed is so low it takes a few minutes to send a sentence, OTOH in a few minutes you can send a sentence to about 3/4 of the planet depending on the time with stuff you can DIY and/or buy for under $100 using the moon as your very reliable communications satellite.

        1. I think EME requires much more RF power than this and I think the best mode is slow Morse as the SNR is really low. Maybe PSK (and it’s variants), SSTV, or FAX may work I dunno… I know the NSA (or CIA) did use a clever method of listening to secret Soviet radar during CW using EME but how they did it is a mystery to me.

          1. It doesn’t need more power (just better antenna :). Slow morse is nice, but below the noise protocols are even better (and slower). JT65 is one of those. You can also check other from the JT family or WSPR for example. All invented for extremely low power below the noise communication.

          2. I agree with the later half of your paragraph, however, you need to talk to a HAM doing EME. A good antenna (> 20 dB forward gain) is key, yes, but you need more than 100 Watts feed to the antenna (measured after line loss). That’s not measured outside the antenna either. I think others here are saying Google is NOT actually feeding the antenna at 100 KW. That’s measured effectively “outside” the antenna. That’s what I meant by high RF power. I dunno… what is the effective power of 100W fed into a 20dB gain antenna?

            Also Wikipedia has a recorded EME voice-comm with a Doppler-shifted SSB from Italy to Netherlands. You can hear the moon echo near the end. He (IZ1BPN) was feeding 250-350 Watts to the 8 meter parabolic antenna at 1.296 GHz.
            [audio src="" /]

          3. In addition to a huge path loss, EME introduces phase distortions due to the spherical shape of the reflector (moon) and ionspheric effects. Any high data rate EME communications method will have to be very clever in correcting for these, if it’s even possible.

      1. I don’t think any chickens will be roasted. The transmitter output power is likely very low and the antenna directivity extremely high. Because the short wavelength of 80GHz, even a small dish will have phenomenal gain.

      2. A half watt won’t roast a whole chicken very fast, no matter how well it’s focused. And if you look at the actual document referenced, the maximum total output power of that “100kW” transmitter is one half watt. It is focused in a narrow beam, such that, if you wanted to build a transmitter that would produce a field strength in all directions the same as Google’s transmitter produces in the center of its beam, you’d need around 100kW total. But that high number is an indication of how tightly it’s focused, not of how much total power is present.

  2. Why was this titled “GOOGLE IS BUILDING A 100KW RADIO TRANSMITTER” instead of “Google Experimenting with Highly-Efficient Cantenna and Consumer Wi-Fi Gear”? I’d have still read it but I wouldn’t feel cheated of my time.

          1. You could hijack your neighbor’s wi-fi until he catches you and closes the access – turns on WEP or worse. Or you could live near an office like realtor, coffee shop, doctor, large company (guest access), hospital, McDonald’s, Mall, Town Hall, etc (mostly free access wi-fi). If you need more range use a metal coffee can as a 2.4 GHz wave-guide. I made a DIY yagi-uda and it had decent range. Just used coat hanger wire, ruler, tin-snips, glue to hold the elements in place, and stiff Styrofoam rectangular bar (Walmart Arts & Crafts) and a ARRL Handbook for antenna fabrication. Mounted it on a tripod too. The only hard part is soldering the driven element to a 50Ω coax. Also mark your elements so as not to get them mixed up – as they are mostly different lengths and is critical.

            If you bore-sight it to a laser pointer you can aim it at a known router location in the target building. Just turn laser off when NetStumbler tells you you have maximum SNR. NetStumber has a cool GPS capability to augment war-driving too. Remember, don’t out stay your welcome by making VOIP calls on your free wi-fi host AP. Some are smart enough to shut you off (like most malls, Barnes and Noble et al).

  3. That’s a 100 kW transmitter in exactly the same way as my laser pointer is (coincidentally) also a 100 kW transmitter, despite having an actual output power of one milliwatt: it’s all in the beam width (i.e. antenna gain) to make it the same apparent brightness as an isotropic radiator of that power..

    Now, my laser pointer only needs an output aperture less than a millimeter in diameter to achieve that. Google’s dish needs to be at least a meter wide (and mechanically precise to better than a millimeter over that size).

      1. Either Dave is being willfully antagonistic or he has reading comprehension difficulties.

        Any recipient of that radio beam or my laser pointer beam, be it a precision detector or just your eyeballs, will see it indistinguishable in brightness from a 100 kilowatt isotropic source. That’s what antenna gain is all about.

      2. I agree with Dave. The total optical average power of the laser pointer is 1mW, and it is not isotropic. To achieve the same optical power density from an isotropic optical source would require a source of 314 KW at a distance of 5 meters to achieve the same fluence.

        1. Check your arithmetic. You’re out by a factor of at least 25. A typical laser pointer beam divergence is 1 mrad.
          You also still appear to completely miss the point of the exercise.

          1. Larry, seriously, dude? How good do you expect these things to be without a beam expander? Go ahead and measure yours and report back. If it’s really good you’ll be 0.7 mrad. Your dollar store special might get 2 mrad.

          2. Beam collimation is adjustable on most solid state lasers (and most lasers in general). As Danny said below, all you need is the optical power to fall within the 1mm^2 at a distance of 5 meters from the laser.
            As you mentioned, the larger the beam is the better the collimation can be, so often up-collimaton can be used to correct for poor divergence. We repeatably achieve 500 microradian divergence from Guassian profile beams having M^2 values of <1.2. Even with our OPO and OPA products. This divergence value can be further improved with additional optics.

          1. Danny, that’s nonsensical and not even incorrect. A Gaussian has infinite tails. It can never have a “distribution entirely within a 1 mm^2 spot”, no matter how fantastical a focus you have. Mark’s arithmetic is correct if you (naively) assume a laser point can deliver a beam with a one square mm cross section at a distance of 5m, which is an odd assumption to not even state.

            None of this changes the original statement that, from the vantage point of an observer seeing either that original radio beam or my laser beam, the source appears as bright as a 100 kilowatt isotropic radiator, despite the actual transmitted power being much less.

          2. No Paul, a Guassian power distribution does not have infinite tails. Even if that were true, the optics in the laser would prevent that. And no, the 100KW number is incorrect.

          3. Danny, of course a Gaussian is unbounded and has tails that extend to infinity. Says so right on the tin. If you want to invent a “Guassian” that does not exhibit that trait for your own convenience, you’re welcome to. Go ahead and define Pi to be exactly 3.0 too, while you’re at it, but don’t expect everyone else to believe that to be true either.

          1. Lag is terrible or enigmatically correctly timed for your personal needs/circumstances? You have to also allow for it’s personal agendas regarding timing. Maybe a padded cell is just the right response for some as they may have abused Hoffman’s folly above and other controlled substances. Ever heard of dual diagnosis? Sure you have… (/humor)

        1. That’s kinda by what I meant by “brain waves”…

          It is “bidirectional” by way of uplink from you and downlink through pertinent ancient text proverbs, letters, and books from a handful of Iron Age SW Asians men. Also empirical incidences that go beyond common coincidence after a silent “thought” uplink kinda’ esoterically narrows down (filters) who the response was from.Of course this only applies to Theists. :-)

  4. Long haul microwave has been doing this for years. The transmitter emits 5 watts and elliptical wave-guide couples it to a parabolic dish with a beam width of 6 degrees. 5 watts with 45-55 dB of gain from the dish and you can shoot a signal 50 miles at 300 Mbps with QAM256 modulation. Look at Aviat Eclipse radios and Andrews microwave dishes.

          1. Some lives may have been ruined – something which C2H5OH unfortunately also does some times. Many lives have been brightened up through respectful use of the substance.

          2. Yeah I heard that psychiatric medical community experimented with it back in those days. It allegedly helped the famous Hollywood actor Cary Grant. Unfortunately the negatives outweigh the positives due to the “flashback” side-effects.I know of many “victims” who still experience them after decades of non use (forced or voluntary).

            I know the OP on our off-topic thread here was only joking, but what benefit would Google get from a “mind control” RF project? And where is the empirical data that RF emissions can be exploited for such things? You can allegedly induce hallucinations in humans by low frequency EMF (ELF-VLF?) per the late Dr. John E. Mack MD of Harvard Medical School back in 1990s to 2004..

  5. Here is one possible explanation:

    Why 70-80 GHz?
    New Solution for Urban Communication

    For urban backhaul, a new solution for network operators lies outside the traditional offerings available on the market today. E-band wavelengths in the 70-80 GHz frequencies are vastly underutilized compared to traditional microwave frequencies, making E-band frequencies much more available than traditional microwave bands –

    * Lots of spectrum bandwidth compared to the traditional microwave bands — furthermore, spectrum is much easier to find and license than uncongested bands in 5-40 GHz

    * Over-the-air capacities can easily reach 3 Gbps per channel using very wide bandwidth channels

    * Easy or light licensing available in many countries — US applicants can file for a nationwide E-band license

    * Exceptional transmission performance for short distances

    * Compact products with frequency re-use in urban settings


    * Short distances, under 1-2 miles
    * High capacities, up to 1 Gbps
    * Lightweight to enable installation on light poles
    * Easy to install — within 30 minutes
    * Small and unobtrusive — ordinance friendly
    * Frequency re-use — enables high link density

    Source: Aviat Networks (aka Harris Stratex Networks) – Santa Clara, California


      * Short distances, under 1-2 miles
      * High capacities, up to 1 Gbps
      * Lightweight to enable installation on light poles
      * Easy to install — within 30 minutes
      * Small and unobtrusive — ordinance friendly
      * Frequency re-use — enables high link density ”

      Look for a related comment by me below at March 2, 2016 at 11:29 pm. Press CTRL-F and type Ricochet and press [Enter]

  6. I know what it is for:

    Skybender is the project name for the 5G network of high altitude repeater drones (solar electric planes) that will distribute internet connection to ground based isps in hard to reach areas. Like FB. Google discarded loon,

    The frequencies described in the application at the top matches the frequencies they are mentioning in their press material.

  7. Do the math – the US is locked down with internet connections/speeds worse than Belgium because of the monopoly of fiber carriers that have paid good money to Congress and various state legislatures to keep those monopolies.

    How do you look into breaking that stranglehold…?

    Then there is the whole satphone thing…

  8. You may have seen one of these in your neighborhood on several light poles:

    It is a failed wireless internet network of UHF repeaters to a central router somewhere down the street. It was called Ricochet Wireless, Evidently it went through various evolution of failed business models until your local utility company realized it would make an excellent meter reader repeater system for commercial establishments. This is where it is today.

    This Google project sounds like this to me. I think they want to transmit their signal to these local nodes down several streets in a city at fiber optic throughput speeds. And the light pole node would have a FDDI infrastructure for the last mile to your house or flat. They could receive by you sending your upload back the same way and Google would have a central node somewhere in town to receive it. Or the trip back uplink could be via conventional methods. I think this would be the next evolution for their Google WiMax system proposed to be nationwide by now. (I think!).

    Or if you have the money the node could be dedicated to just your house. I think it would need a parabolic antenna versus a dipole omni. All of the outer-space based wi-fi jokes are better served by the new NASA LASER projects. They could actually setup a LASER comm-link to the moon and Mars with it. The ISS could use it for wi-fi too. I don’t think Google is aiming the antenna up to outer-space. I think it is a terrestrial microwave project. And requested FCC secrecy is common. They just want to protect the I.P. secret-sauce.

    Haven’t you ever seen the FCC get letters from manufacturers to not post the schematics for their proprietary radio system on the FCC database? This seems similar. Also I’ll bet InQTel has something to do with the R&D of this and that’s an automatic black-drape over everything if you know who they really are funded by. Who knows this may be some sort of comm-link for their new Google Car or something.

  9. Ionosphere: The ionosphere overlaps the other atmospheric layers, from above the Earth. The air is ionized by the Sun’s ultraviolet light. These ionized layers affect the transmittance and reflectance of radio waves. Different ioniosphere layers are the D, E (Heaviside-Kennelly), and F (Appleton) regions. They won’t reach the earth.

    1. Leon Black – He was talking about the path the radio wave would take up through the Earth’s ionosphere (I), then to the moon, then back through it back to the Google antenna. He was right that phase distortions would happen from the moon bounce and through the “I” twice! EME means Earth-Moon-Earth. There are HAM radio enthusiasts who actually do it. However, I think lower frequencies can’t be used due to being reflected off of the I. The E-Band probably would have no problem getting through. This phenomena (the I) is the main reason why it is highly unlikely any advanced ET civilization could ever see or hear our early radio and TV from another planet or star system. Mainly because most of the legacy signal (in HF and lower freqs) where just reflected back at Earth by the I. Not much Amos and Andy** floating out there passing Sagittarius* right now. (* where the WOW! signal allegedly originated – Google it ** Amos & Andy – a allegedly racist American radio/TV program from 1951).

      However, Mr Bose was dabbling with 60 GHz in 1890’s. I wonder if it was detected by ET’s listening stations. (/humor) ;-)

  10. Self driving cars + balloons + mesh repeaters = ~100% area coverage.
    If every moving/flying/floating thing made by google is paired with a repeater, they essentially get an huge self adjusting intranet. Until the day it gets so big that it becomes the main internet.

  11. I heard from a Google employee that the NSA was able to subvert Google security by simply going into physical locations and tapping into wires, fibers, and machines. Since they are the government, they have literally unlimited license to do whatever they want.

    If Google starts operating some amount of their communications through a wireless link, there’s not much that he NSA can do, short of going on Google’s property, which would make the physical attack obvious.

    1. Andrew Pullin (@AndrewPullin) – GOOGLE Room 641A and learn of how AT&T is NOT your friend… “Mobilizing Your World,” for the NSA

      You are absolutely right… however… a E-Band GOOGLE link to your house only makes it EASIER for NSA (et al) not harder. No FISA warrant needed either. Remember, they only need FISA warrants to CYA for a prosecution in court. If all they want is intel for need-to-know stuff they can send in their CSS or “contractors” to “fix before it happens” the so be it. I’m sure Mike Hayden’s new book wont cover any of that stuff “on the edge”.

      FYI after Jan-2017 hypothetically POTUS Trump will feasibly grant the alphabet soup the keys-to-the-kingdom (per se) and FISA will be a thing of the past. No longer will NSA need to illegally hide under the guise of a FBI standard training op to disguise their barely-legal jacking in anywhere they want (per Mr. Snowden). The same applies to FBI and it’s CARNIVORE. Mr. Comey will get his old predecessor’s (Louis Freeh) wish to have a backdoor in any corporation’s intranet EXCEPT Trump Towers/Casino/Etc and his corporate cronies – OF COURSE!!!.

    1. Whatnot – But D.E. weapons don’t usually have that kind of range. Also we (USA) don’t need a Russian immigrant (Google’s CEO – Sergey Brin) pointing dangerous weapons at anything from USA just so we would be falsely implicated in the bird-assault. We have already been implicated by PRC et al for doing just that with our alleged DARPA killer-birds (angry birds? LOL) hiding in space junk (clever idea though). I can think of ANOTHER very tiny but clever young country who also would think of such a nefarious ploy and hitch a ride out of Baikonur or Tahiti or somewhere. Motive? Who knows???

      Also I think we (USA) already have a very capable killer-satellite program using jet fighters and missiles.We had to destroy one of our own birds too: On 01-Feb-2008, the U.S.N. destroyed a malfunctioning U.S. spy satellite USA-193 using a ship-fired RIM-161 Standard Missile 3. We used this in 1985:

      I’m pretty sure it’s part of a new idea to bring fiber-optic (FDDI) like speeds to our homes. They would mount the rcvrs nodes on light poles because of their closeness to our homes and 7 x 24 endless power from light company. Google has always wanted to do nationwide WiMax but I have never seen it. This may be the answer Sergey Brin is not a war-fighter. He’s a computer scientist like most of us HaD’ers.

  12. Hopefully, they are building it to broadcast this message:

    “We, the people of planet earth, call upon all extraterrestrial civilizations to help us rid our world of all weapons of mass destruction and put an end to the madness of war.

    In return for this service we, the human race, offer our eternal friendship and pledge to maintain peace, throughout the cosmos, forevermore.”

    Please sign the Universal Peace Petition:

    By signing you will also be promoting mutually beneficial contact between humanity and extraterrestrial civilizations.

    1. Peter Dunn – All well and good… HOWEVER, if transmitted today it would take almost 100 ly’s to reach the most plausibly advanced civilization per Dr. Jerry Erdman (WOW! Signal SETI discovery in 1970’s at Delaware Ohio (USA)). That would the Sagittarius system. The Ukrainians have already sent such a signal via their radio telescope but it will be years before it arrives at it’s designation. Voyager (X) has a similar on-board message (per se) and is only in the dark space past Pluto (nothing there of interest and the ET’s would need to figure out how to play the record player).

      But do you think we need such an interstellar message sent to an advanced civilization that does not even know we exist? What if they deem the needed “fix” is to come and decide to remove the troublesome element. Mainly US (mass extinction event)! How many scifi movies do you need to see to know this would be a very bad idea? It seems that some in the world governmental authorities are already aware of this hypothetical scenario and have contingency plans in effect (see Brookings Institute first contact protocols). POTUS Ronald Reagan was aware and gave a speech at UN about the possibility.

      And finally, would you want GOOGLE with it’s Russian-born CEO (1 of 2 CEOs) sending such a message with their track record of allegiance with nefarious governmental entities? Remember they are not just in bed with the alphabet soup of America they are also helping the PRC to keep their BILLIONS of citizens in the dark.

      There, here are some plausible connected dots for your food for thought…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s