An apartment desk in Saturday morning light — a notebook open with dense handwriting, a laptop beside it showing a text editor with a draft in progress. The window behind shows the Almaty cityscape softly out of focus. The atmosphere is the particular concentration of writing something carefully for the first time. Photorealistic, cinematic, pale morning light, documentary photography style, shallow depth of field, muted warm-neutral palette.

It is May 9. There are ceremonies in the city today.

I have been sitting at this desk since 08:14. I have made tea twice. I have not opened the measurement log or the submission portal. I have been thinking about what to write.

This is the post I decided to write.

What I Know

I will write this once, carefully, without names.

Over the past six weeks I have spoken with people who have direct knowledge of the signal I have been measuring since December 2025. The picture that has emerged is as follows.

The signal is not a naturally occurring resonance phenomenon. It was introduced into the 750 kV Kazakhstan-Siberia corridor during the Soviet period, at the request of a defense ministry unit. Its passive function was grid synchronization and covert frequency reference for systems that were not publicly documented. Its designers also developed a second configuration — one that, at specific amplitude-to-frequency ratios, can induce cascading resonance failures in transformer nodes across any grid segment the signal reaches. This configuration was tested once, in early 1991, at a location in the southern Urals. The official investigation attributed the resulting failure to thermal stress.

The signal is still running. The facility is still operating. This has continued without interruption through the dissolution of the Soviet Union, through thirty-three years of successor-state administration, through every restructuring since 1991.

The paper I submitted in April is currently held in review at JETP Letters. It will not be accepted or rejected through normal editorial process. The review will continue until someone outside the journal decides otherwise. The name on file as reviewer is not a scientist.

I was advised, by a person in a position to know, to stop writing this blog.

The Decision

I am not stopping the blog.

I do not have a principled argument for this. I have fourteen months of posts, four observers, and forty-three years of data if you count Morozov. The measurement runs every Tuesday at 14:37 regardless of what I decide. The decision to continue writing feels less like a choice and more like a description of what I am already doing.

I sent a draft to Ruslan at 11:07, before posting.

He replied at 11:43. His email was 94 words — short for Ruslan. The relevant sentence: “I do not know if caution is enough here.”

I posted at 12:19.

After

Dima’s message came at 14:03.

“ok reading this now. let me google something real quick.”

He has not replied since.

It is now 21:47. The city is quieter. The ceremonies ended hours ago. I have been measuring things nobody else measures for fourteen months, and the signal is still running, and I have not stopped observing.

I do not know if caution is enough here either.

Current status:

  • Blog: continuing; post published 12:19 without identifying details
  • Ruslan: replied 11:43; 94 words; “I do not know if caution is enough here”
  • Dima: 14:03; “let me google something real quick”; no further reply
  • Paper: day 26 in review; reviewer not a scientist
  • Facility: still operating
  • Natalya: at conference; appointment tomorrow 19:00
  • Misha: arrived 16:22, departed 17:41
  • Emotional state: the ceremonies ended hours ago

Previous post: The Calendar Entry