Home » Uncategorized » Russia


Follow World Hum Map and Database Project on WordPress.com
Follow World Hum Map and Database Project on WordPress.com

In 1987 I finished a minor in Russian language from the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The only times I ever used it included once at the at the U of M. I happened to be at the Arena when Russian old-timers were playing against the U of M Bison hockey team. I facilitated a very brief translation of a simple request from one of the Russian players. I forgot who won the game.

I intend to penetrate the Russian media regarding the Worldwide Hum, and if you have native fluency in Russian, then I need your help (in two ways). I searched for information about the Worldwide Hum in the Russian Language. I found a number of results, but it was pretty clear that the documents were translations from English, and sometimes subtleties were lost. One of the articles tells me that my first name is “Sam” (сам) , rather than Glen. Well, we learn something new every day.

If you can read Russian well, then I would appreciate your summary of what now appears about the Worldwide Hum on the Russian internet – is it being written about seriously? Are there any verified quotes from Russian scientists or universities? Is it all translated from English or is there original writing? How far back do their reports go? If it’s the 1960s or after, then that would be a very important finding.

I’ve been working to get back to bilingual status, and I think it’s very important to make inroads into the Russian media, the way that we have in the English speaking world. Alongside entering China media, I think this an important thing that we can focus on right now that doesn’t cost a dime. If you can write well in Russian, then may I encourage you to start forwarding translated items and links from Al Jazeera and BBC, and so on to Russian popular media. If the Hum is not prevalent in Russia, then that would obviously be a huge finding. If it is, then that would confirm what I suspect: which is that the Hum is a worldwide condition that correlates with population density. If so, this points to a medical condition that might have environmental prerequisites. It is possible that some elements or combination of elements of modern life may be causing the auditory system to receive signals from the brain, just as the brain sends false signals in tinnitus.

I would prefer that a Canadian lab solve this, but if ends up that Russian, Chinese, or American scientists find the answer, that’s also fine with me. Again I encourage readers to look through this blog and notice the postings regarding what concrete things can be done to help solve this scientific mystery.


  1. Lisle says:

    I’m interested in your new line of inquiry Glen. What do you suspect is in Russia that would point to a ‘medical condition’ that does not exist elsewhere? My visits to rural areas surprised me, in that the hum was louder there, while urban density does explain higher numbers in cities. I have been writing in the comments boxes of various news sites as hum articles appear, but few comments have survived overnight. I keep my reaction calm and direct, but any mention of technology (as broad reference, NOT cellphones or military or the like) as the possible source does not seem to be tolerated at all. Al-Jazeera deleted my post immediately. Do other people contribute comments and have them deleted too? I don’t have a persecution complex, it’s just really interesting as part of my job is to moderate FB and site comments on our news website. Very few posts on general news stories are deleted unless unlawful.

  2. George G. says:

    Good move!

    Russian scientists are renowned for telling it how it is.

    They are not tethered to multinational corporations who reward their research teams for lying. (Not yet, but that may change)

    If the Hum is a physical phenomenon, those guys will isolate it, for free.

    Good luck Sam and keep us updated on this exciting venture.


  3. Charlie says:

    If the Hum is a medical condition, perhaps an infectious agent is involved.

    A pathogen such as a virus might explain a few things about the Hum.

    Eg. some areas seem to have a higher density of hearers than others. a patchy distribution of sufferers could be due to the way the infection is spreading. It may not have reached those places that don’t report the Hum. (There could be a higher density of sufferers in more densely populated areas, or vice versa. It some ways the distribution of reports on the Hum map does seem to reflect this, but obviously there are other factors involved here.)

    People have reported that they couldn’t previously hear the Hum, but that more recently they have started hearing it – this might be caused by someone acquiring the ‘infection’ .

    It seems to affect older people more than young ones – maybe older people are more susceptible.

    The Hum seemingly appeared in the 1970’s – new human pathogens do appear now and again.

    More generally a medical cause could also explain why only some can hear it, why the symptoms are not exactly the same for everybody, and how the condition is independant of location (ie you can hear it everywhere)


    • George G. says:

      I would go along with that Charlie.

      My wife never heard the Hum until she met me, and I know a fellow who claims he “caught the Hum” after visiting a hearer whom he hadn’t seen for years.

      There are, however, many people with partners who cannot hear the Hum and visa versa. If reports start trickling in of hearers’ partners suddenly “hearing”, then your theory will certainly gain momentum.

      To think that we may be carriers of a yet unknown pathogen——.!

      That alone must surely raise alarm bells amongst the medicos; their absence during discussions has been pitiful, I think.

      • Ian says:

        Hi George, it is both interesting and alarming (!) that you report that your wife began hearing after she met you (and the guy you mention also). It reinforces my (humble) opinion that why we begin to hear should be of real importance – not all hear and those who do hear report a point in time when they began hearing.

        Also, does anybody remember Kevin Grey? Kevin reported that he had overcome “the hum” – had stopped hearing – by some kind of effort of will (my description), if I remember correctly. Kevin has been, to the best of my knowledge, strangely silent on this forum ever since, despite the odd plea for him to return and try to contribute to our understanding. Is it a coincidence? That once relieved you no longer have a need for this forum, and so go silent, like, at least for those the hum has done?

      • Charlie and George –

        Good thought about the idea of “catching the hum”. I am not so sure that most people remember the first time, and exactly how, they first heard the Hum. Was it because it became annoying (over some threshold) or did some person (or news report) call it to our attention. The first time I heard it some 20 years ago it was the former. I then managed to ignore it for many years. Last year I was reacquainted with it “thanks to” hearing Glen on George Noory’s radio show. In total, for me, more interesting than annoying!

        I suspect that many hearers noticed the Hum when someone asked “do you hear THAT” and persisted. If true, I don’t see that it indicates anything particular about a source or a possible cure.

        Perhaps like a rash, it just becomes too itchy to ignore, or perhaps someone ask why the back of your hand is red. Something like that.

      • Charlie says:

        Recently there were a couple of people on the first entry to this blog – ‘Who is behind this project?’, who reckon that they’ve started hearing the Hum in the last few weeks. Assuming that it really is the Hum that they’re ‘hearing’, it does suggest that some sort of (internal?) change has occured.

        It would be interesting to hear from people who do recall when they started to hear It. And maybe get some info about their circumstances at the time. Eg. Was it a sudden change, or did the Hum ‘fade in’ more slowly? Did they change their location/travel recently? Time of year, weather – whatever. Etc.

        Unfortunately I don’t know when I first started to ‘hear’ the Hum. I think that I just assumed that it was part of the normal ambient sound typical of a semi urban area. It was only later when I moved to the bush that I realised that there was something very strange about this particular ‘sound’.

        Oh yeah, thinking of absent posters, one I would have really liked to have heard more from was the person in Scotland who was in the process of getting a few Hearers in the same place and comparing their experiences.

        But the absence that intrigues me most is that of Deming. His paper makes a great read, he obviously had a keen interest in the Hum at one stage. It seems a little odd to me that he didn’t have a role, or at least a more obvious interest in the design, build and testing of Glen’s DB.


      • I think now is the time (perhaps better here than in a stand-alone post) to say that a number of Deming’s conclusions appear to be incorrect. To be fair, Deming did not have the data that I have. Indeed, we have a mountain of data now compared to even 10 years ago. The repeated wisdom about the age distribution was incorrect. The notion of female preponderance was incorrect. And it now appears that the geographical localization is not so (the Hum appears to follow population density). I think the next big – and obviously crucial – item to establish is whether the Hum actually did start in Britain during mid-20th century. Dr. Deming is aware of this blog.

      • Perhaps Deming has lost interest or not unlikely is unaware of this blog. Why not contact him?

        Deming is best known as a “climate change skeptic”:(believes climate change is natural – not manmade):

        and is the author of a paperback:

        “Black & White: Politically Incorrect Essays on Politics, Culture, Science, Religion, Energy, and Environment” which is a god read although there is nothing about the Hum there.

      • I’d prefer not to, but I think I need to make a comment on this point. Colin Dickey pulled a “gotcha” question on me during his interview for the New Republic article when he revealed to me that Deming was a climate change skeptic, and that he held certain political views. I told Dickey that the political views were completely irrelevant and that I wasn’t interested. As for the climate change, I told Dickey that on the one hand, I think it’s crucial to have people around to ask the hard questions. On the other hand, there is an overwhelming consensus among the world’s top climate scientists regarding global warming. Specific elements of climate change skepticism, such as the Medieval Warming Period, have shown to be localized and that there is very strong evidence that the global average temperature trends are moving in one direction. But then, even that has only indirect impact on anything Deming had to say about the Hum.

  4. George G. says:

    Hi Ian,

    Yes, I do remember KG.

    His writing suggested he developed a method which suppressed the Hum.

    But I’m not sure if his absence since can be interpreted as “strangely silent”.

    I would suggest his absence is simply because he felt his claim was not taken seriously, or, perhaps, he reviewed his method and discovered some flaw?

    Who knows, perhaps this discussion may bring him back if he has credible research to report.

    There certainly would be many hearers willing to read (and discuss) any new developments he may have.

  5. George G. says:

    Charlie, (or Glen)

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe Deming played a major role in the design of Glen’s D Box, after all, it does carry his name.

    • In his article, Deming summarized the formula for radio skin depth. I confirmed those physics from other sources, and then searched for the material that would meet those requirements. It turned out that mild steel had both the magnetic permeability and resistivity such that a pretty thin layer of it would block essentially all radio waves at 10 kHz. The simple hatch was my idea, using a radio-proof gasket that I sourced out from a company in Texas that sells space-age type materials. You should note, however, that a reader from Denmark has challenged my results, claiming that at such low frequencies, the magnetic part of the EM field will not be blocked, and that a more elaborate set up will be required to test that. I am looking into his claims.

    • Charlie says:

      Hi George

      My apologies, I didn’t word it very well. I know that the original idea for the Box was Deming’s, so I was wondering how it was that he hadn’t seemingly shown much interest in Glen’s version. But after also learning about his views on climate change etc. I guess the guy’s going to have to remain a bit of an enigma to me.

      Hi Glen

      I didn’t know that the age distribution idea (ie. that older people are more susceptible?) was discredited. I don’t want to be spreading misinformation, I only hope I’m not laboring under any other misapprehensions!


      • George G. says:

        Well Charlie,

        Talking of enigmas, it seems that electromagnetic waves may still be in the race.

        Mr. D sure left his mark, whatever his broader views may be.

  6. SGVH says:

    A bit off topic: When the experts talk about “noise,” do they simply mean the “transients/harmonics” & not “real noise” like we hear? I just saw this quote today & because it mentions LOW FREQUENCY NOISE at 10Hz+, I thought you might be interested:

    Quote from:
    A foremost European expert in radio engineering [UK radio engineer Alasdair Philips, inventor of the Accoustimeter, a broadband audio microwave detector used to identify ambient RF signals] confirms the incredible complexity of this ubiquitous electrosmog:

    “There are now about 20 modulation systems in widespread common use, plus about 50 or more specialist ones.”

    Regarding the manipulation of radio signals to increase data speed and accommodate millions of eager Wireless users, he says:

    “Phase modulation is a relatively new technique … that allows far more data to be encoded onto an RF carrier (microwave signal) … Instead of a nice smooth sine wave, the RF carrier repeatedly jumps from one part of the sine wave to a different part, as it encodes the data. This produces a lot of VERY fast, sharp “edges” and a lot of “aggressive” low frequency noise (10-HZ to 100 kilohertz) or even faster.”
    End Quote.

    I’m not sure what he means by “even faster,” though. Does he mean the noise gets faster? (That happens here for sure. The pace/speed is always changing & can become very fast indeed. The faster, the more “penetrating” & torturous.)

    • EJR says:

      Thank you very much for the informational links SGVH.


      When Glen conducted his “Demming box” experiment he experienced no noticeable change in the intensity of the hum. The box I understand was constructed out of 1.6 mm thick (16 gauge) mild steel which has reasonably good magnetic permeability (absorption) and should have been able to easily absorb/reflect and eliminate pretty much everything in the commercial band wavelengths and most (not all) of the lowest of any military wavelength which are found below 300Khz. The lower the frequency the more difficult it is to shield and thus more thickness of shielding is required.

      Extremely low frequencies penetrate significantly and are difficult to shield. They are frequently used to communicate at depth with submarines since they can penetrate substantial depths of seawater (and earth).


      Each “skin” gives you just over a 60% reduction in signal strength and thus many skin depths are required to ‘completely eliminate’ a signal.

      Several natural sources also exist, most notably Schumann resonance frequencies, which originate in the ionosphere.

      From Wiki…

      “Typical spectrum of ELF electromagnetic waves in the Earth’s atmosphere, showing peaks caused by the Schumann resonances. The Schuman resonances are the resonant frequencies of the spherical Earth-ionosphere cavity. Lightning strikes cause the cavity to “ring” like a bell, causing peaks in the noise spectrum. The sharp power peak at 50 Hz is caused by radiation from global electric power grids. The rise of the noise at low frequencies (left side) is radio noise caused by slow processes in the Earth’s magnetosphere.”


      The 50Hz contamination is NOT coming directly from the HV power lines, it is the signal being reflected back down from the D and E levels of the ionosphere ~60-100km above. As many have posted, and as I have personally experienced, the hum is usually louder in rural areas away from the grid which is a fast fading linear source antenna (1/r^2).

      So if I had to guess (since I already know it’s an electromagnetic signal triggering the response)..

      Wave interference of multiple >> “By the 1990s, The Hum had become a commonly documented phenomenon in several other parts of the world, from Texas to New Zealand to Largs in Scotland, which, rather ominously, is next to the Faslane nuclear submarine base.” >> Many posters here (including myself) have noticed a regular timing in the increases/decreases in signal strength, the lack of signal entirely during electrical storms, and apparently now there are even couples who both hear the hum (due to a viral infection?). In my opinion if two people hear the hum, infection or not, at the same time at the same location (assuming they live together) then it is very likely to be from a signal that is external to both that they are both simultaneously experiencing.

      Most importantly…

      >>> My experience has been that the hum can be reduced through using reflective/permeable shielding.

    • EJR says:

      Sorry but part of my previous response didn’t make it after my “best guess scenario”.

      Basically the guess was between terrestrial man-made sources like military ELF etc. (which I doubt) and the combination of the global power grid reflection signal in the ionosphere with an anomalous amplification of the existing Schumann resonance frequencies.

      Just a guess though.

      • EJR – you said:

        “………. (since I already know it’s an electromagnetic signal triggering the response)………..”
        On what basis, exactly, do you make this claim? Did I miss a posting somewhere?

        You are aware that 50 Hz is not a default power frequency worldwide. Why did Wiki not show the spectrum through and somewhat above 60 Hz?

        You further said: “In my opinion if two people hear the hum, infection or not, at the same time at the same location (assuming they live together) then it is very likely to be from a signal that is external to both that they are both simultaneously experiencing.”

        I assume you agree both partners should be capable of reliable low-frequency pitch-matching and hear the SAME pitch, independently arrived at.

        Incidentally, out of curiosity, what pitch do you, EJR, match to?

        The Schumann resonances are just the integer multiples of the reciprocal of light speed time around the earth (about 7.4 Hz) and the fall off with frequency largely due to natural attenuations (much like harmonics of a musical instrument). In any event, they would seem to be way too low (a few multiples of 7.4 Hz) to account for Hum pitches (most hearing Hum in the 50 Hz to 100 Hz range). Any ideas about this?

        You also said: “…….anomalous amplification of the existing Schumann resonance frequencies…….” . What does that mean?



  7. SGVH says:

    Re: Russia:

    If anyone in Germany can get a hold of this retired Professor (still living at age 94), he, or his associates, would probably know if there are Russian reports of the Hum. If not, he would probably be interested in learning about it anyway, since it is Worldwide.

    Karl Hecht was the one who did a report in 1997 on 878-out-of-1,500 Russian long-term (3-5-10 years) EMF studies (which they did between 1960-1996). The German govt. commissioned him to interpret the Russian studies, but once they got Hecht’s report, they buried it in their archives.

    There’s a photo & brief bio of Hecht in his report here: http://kompetenzinitiative.net/KIT/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/KI_Brochure-6_K_Hecht_web.pdf

    And this German site has more of his brochures in English & probably knows how to reach him:
    kompetenzinitiative .net/KIT/KIT/english-brochures/

  8. SGVH says:

    I left here to go read EMF sites & the first one I visited had a 2012 article with suggestions by a RUSSIAN Professor/MD. Ha! so I’m back to drop off his name (even though he was discussing EMFs, hey, you never know. Scientists should be interested in Worldwide Hums no matter the yet-unknown-source).

    There was this phone/email for Professor Yury Grigoriev with that 2012 post, but it may not currently be accurate:
    Tel./fax: (+7 499)-190-9660
    E-mail: rcnirp@mail.ru

    Professor Yury G. Grigoriev (short bio from):
    tesla .ru/english/membership-03.html
    “Yuri G. Grigoriev – Chairman of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, member of the Russian Academy of Electrical Engineering Sciences, member of International Advising Committee on WHO EMF Project, IEEE member, permanent member of the US Bioelectromagnetic Society (BEMS), Dr. of Med. Sci., Professor.”

    Contact info for that Tesla.ru link:
    phone/fax: (095) 193-0187
    e-mail: info@tesla.ru

    From the same link,maybe this is his relative(?):
    –“Oleg A. Grigoriev – Vice-Chairman of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Director of Center for Electromagnetic Safety, Ph.D. of Biological Sciences.”

    Professor Yury G. Grigoriev, along with another Russian, are listed here under “Scientists & Experts Supporting IEMFA [Int’l EMF Alliance] – Supporting Life Scientists”:
    iemfa .org/supporting-life-scientists/
    –Prof. Grigoriev, Yury, MD, Moscow (Russia), Center for Electromagnetic Safety.
    –Merkulov, Anton, MSc, MSc, Moscow (Russia), Center for Electromagnetic Safety.

    Evidently he really exists, if he’s still living. Here’s a photo & extended bio for Yury at the “EM Radiation Research Trust” site:
    Professor Grigoriev’s specializations are in radiobiology of non-ionizing and ionizing radiation, physiology and neurophysiology especially under extreme environmental conditions. His scientific interests lie in the fields of the biological effects of ionizing and non-ionizing radiation, including physiological mechanisms and the bio-effects of low level radio-frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMF). He has worked in these fields since 1949.

    He is Chairman of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (RNCNIRP), Deputy Chairman of Radiobiology Scientific Council of Academy of Sciences, member of International Advising Committee on WHO EMF Project, IEEE member, permanent member of the US Bioelectromagnetics Society (BEMS), Academician of Academy of Electro technical sciences of Russia, member of board Journal of Radiation Biology and Ecology (RAS). He is a major researcher of radiobiology and hygiene for non-ionizing radiation laboratory of Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological agency (Moscow).

    He has used a variety of different physiological models: imprinting, isolating frog heart, chicken embryo and animals. Mainly his work has involved EMF RF exposure on the nervous system and the brain (EEG) and using modern vestibular stimulation techniques. He has been working safety standards for EMF RF exposure and for space radiation. He has been studying the problem of influence on the organism of weakening geomagnetic fields (effects of magnetic deprivation) for more than 15 years.

    Publications: more 300 papers in refereed journals, 15 books (biological effects of ionizing and non-ionizing radiation, extreme environmental physiology). He has supervised more than successful 67 doctoral dissertations. He was a member of the Governmental Commission on the Chernobyl Accident (1986).

    Professor Yury GRIGORIEV
    Major Researcher of Federal Medical Biophysical Centre FMBA,
    Chairman of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, 46, Zhivopisnaya str., 123182, Moscow, Russia.

    Here’s a 2011 study he published in Radiation Biology, Radiation Ecology, 2011. Volume 51, No.5, p.611-623 re children using mobile devices & the decline in their cognition because of it. Here it says he is “Professor Yury Grigoriev, Chairman of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, a member of the WHO’s International Advisory Committeeon ‘EMF and Health'”:
    electromagnetichealth .org/electromagnetic-health-blog/russian-res-children-emf

    He may be retired by now, hopefully not deceased, but that could be a “door” to finding somebody in Russia who might be interested in the Hum Map. Show them all the “dots” & your “commercial.” 😉

  9. Kal Wayne says:

    A brute force method with Cyrillic (as opposed to native fluency,) could net some decent results with a competent analyst.

    At any rate, a firm explanation of sound localization, and how the source can be misconstrued, would seem a matter of good faith.

    TBH, Soviet era research is available, but difficult to post online.

    There is cost prohibitive prior-scanned research and virgin hard-copies in libraries.

    One has to wonder why you want Soviet data in particular?

    • I’m confused by what you wrote. As to your parting question, I’m not after Soviet data, I’m after data. Russia is a massive country with a very large population and a well-established scientific tradition. Their knowledge of industrial sound and infrasound generation is among the best in the world. The same is true of China, which is why I am interested in finding out what they know about the Hum. The same is true for the Unites States. I’ve exhausted, or at least scanned, most of the available literature in English, but I have basic skills in the Russian language from my university days, which means that some of that literature is more accessible to me.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: