I would worry more about 'thermal waves', if real, as reported by Kornilova as they seem to be highly penetrating
Thanks for that Max - actually I think the 'thermal waves' are actually magnetic - inductive coupling at a distance. Maybe?
About this effect being magnetic - I have my doubts. The propagation characteristics and effects of magnetic fields (particularly when the distance from the source is much larger than the size of the source) are pretty well known.
Now, different people have tried to explain some (possibly assumed) properties with models of entirely different types:
1. Corpuscular (with models sometimes requiring either very large objects or extreme energy levels in order to explain the effects)
2. Unconventional electromagnetic (often with problematic models that violate conservation of charge or other well known basics)
3. Thermal wave / VHF ultrasound with shockwave-like propagation characteristics (as postulated by Dr. Kornilova)
Since the exact nature of these waves is not well understood, it would make sense to double-check some properties experimentally.
Here are some ideas on how at least some of these large classes can be differentiated from each other:
To distinguish 3. (specifically) from 1. or 2.: Ultrasound and thermal waves require a material, therefore cannot propagate in vacuum. A dewar connected to a vacuum pump and a gas inlet (to selectively evacuate the space between source and detector without changing the construction and geometry of the overall experiment) would make the propagation vs. non-propagation of an unknown radiation type in vacuum relatively easy to test. Note however that shockwave like phenomena can refract and reflect off surfaces (and even material density gradients), to there may still be some propagation paths elsewhere around an evacuated dewar.
To distinguish 1. from anything else: Use shields of a dense material (like lead). Large corpuscular objects do not pass through dense material, so a comparison of penetration through a light vs. a dense material should provide an indication of whether there are large corpuscular particles involved. If the unknown radiation passes through lead and through low density plastic with a similar penetration ability, it is unlikely to consist of large matter particles. The difference in mass ratio between an unknown large particle and a lead atom vs. the same particle and a carbon atom would make for distinguishable propagation characteristics.
To distinguish charged vs. neutral particles: A cloud chamber with a magnet (or a pair of electrodes) will do just fine. A classic test, well known since a century.
To distinguish an electromagnetic vs. a shockwave-like interaction of an unknown emission with materials in the environment: use many-layered shields with different types of layer structures.
- An electromagnetic type interaction will be strongest with a multi-layer structure when the layers have different electrical (conductor vs. isolator) or magnetic (ferromagnetic vs. diamagnetic) properties even when the layers all share similar densities and similar sound and shockwave propagation characteristics.
- A shockwave type interaction will be strongest with a multi-layer structure when the layers have different densities and therefore reflect shockwaves on internal surfaces, even when the layers all share similar electrical characteristics.
- In addition, electromagnetic and shock waves can each be absorbed by dissipative materials and it's possible to make materials that are to one type much more dissipative than to the other. Loose layers of paper or thin films can be strongly dissipative to acoustic and shockwave type effects while not doing much at all against electromagnetism, while a dense structure of strongly bonded alternating layers of different conductivities or different characteristic impedances will have effects on anything charged or electromagnetic, while it may pass sound and shock waves as well as any similar homogenous solid material would pass them.