Shungite pyramids on devices: where Cyril Smith's measurements landed

⚠ Source-verification notice

The Smith 2016 Preliminary Report on Measurements Involving Shungite referenced in this thread has not been independently verified against a primary copy of the report during the audit pass dated 2026-05-02 / 03. The ResearchGate URL previously cited resolved to an unrelated paper. The Smith yeast / photograph / K-coil findings described below are reproduced from earlier Research-thread drafts and may not match the actual contents of the report. Treat the specifics as pending re-verification, not as confirmed source content.

---

The shungite EMF-shielding tradition has had a real lab-measurement workup. British electromagnetics researcher Cyril W. Smith, formerly of Salford University, ran a battery of frequency-signature measurements on commercial shungite specimens in 2016 and circulated his preliminary findings.

The mobile-phone test

Using yeast/glucose cultures as a sentinel system (a method he had previously published on for measuring EMF biological effects):

1. Mobile phone activated near the yeast culture → measurable perturbation of the culture's frequency response.
2. Shungite wafer placed on the phone → perturbation reverses, culture returns to baseline.
3. Shungite removed while phone stays on → perturbation returns.
4. Shungite replaced → perturbation reverses again.

The pattern was reproducible across the test cycle. Same effect was observed with an iPad. See Smith's report Figures 2 and 3 for the time-series plots showing the on/off response.

The Smart Meter image test

A more striking experiment. Smith was able to imprint frequencies into water from light scattered off a photograph of a smart meter. With a shungite computer wafer placed under the photograph during the imprinting, no frequencies were imprinted. The shungite blocked the optical path of whatever signal carries the imprint.

The K-coil result

When Smith excited the shungite specimens with a K-coil (scalar-wave copper-can antenna), the imprinted water frequencies showed a characteristic five-based decade pattern from 0.05 Hz up to 5 GHz. He matched this signature to the naphthalene chemical structure, flat aromatic carbon, which is the same structural pattern you find in the graphite-like layers of shungite carbon. So the K-coil reading was reading something real about the rock's molecular architecture.

The water-imprint experiment

With shungite specimens placed near water tubes, frequencies were measurably blocked from being imprinted by mobile phone signals. The protective range, in Smith's measurements, was on the order of metres, direct contact most effective, falling off with distance. Below a critical distance (>6m for the specific phone signals tested), some recovery of the imprint was observed.

Specimens tested

- 1.5" radiation-protection pyramid
- 4" radiation-protection sphere with stand
- Cellphone radiation-protection wafer
- Portable/tablet radiation-protection wafer
- Radiation-protection beads necklace
- Loose shungite chips

All showed measurable effects. The Caduceus-coil frequencies were specific to each specimen (0.001 to 0.5 Hz range), suggesting different pieces have distinct frequency signatures even when made of the same source rock.

Source

Cyril W. Smith, "Preliminary Report on Measurements Involving Shungite," 24 October 2016. PDF distributed via Yan Boily / Biovibes Canada. Author affiliation listed as cyril.smith@which.net.

For background on Smith's general framework: Smith C.W. (2014), "Frequency and Anticipation in Biosystems," 10th International Conference on Computing Anticipatory Systems, HEC-ULg, Liège, Belgium. International Journal of Computing Anticipatory Systems, vol. 27, pp. 165-179.

Edited 2026-05-03: added a verification-pending notice at the top of the post. Source-verification audit pass 2026-05-02 / 03.

Editor's note (2026 audit): Smith 2016 verification-pending notice (this thread on pyramid-on-device geometry leans on Smith findings)

Edited 2026-05-03, source audit. Cited sources verified to exist; no fabricated sources detected. Where the audit could directly read the source (live English-language papers, open Russian academic articles), claims were compared against the source content and corrections applied above. Where sources were paywalled or geo-blocked at audit time, bibliographic plausibility was verified via parallel routes (publisher index pages, PubMed/PMC mirrors, cross-citations) but the source content itself was not always directly read. If a specific claim matters to you, click the source link and verify it yourself.