War Breaks Out – Between the AI’s

While the public marvels at how quickly AI tools are transforming daily life—from writing code to managing calendars to generating college essays—another, far less visible war is underway. This one isn’t fought in codebases or research papers. It’s not about model size or token limits. No, the real war between AIs is being fought in the browser, the OS kernel, the background processes of your devices—and it’s being disguised as compatibility glitches, sync delays, and performance quirks.

Let’s call it what it is: Product Manipulation as Proxy War.

The Hidden Battlefield: Browsers, App Stores, and Sync Layers

Today, a user working with ChatGPT in Firefox can generate and download a 60-page survival manual with embedded formatting, revised sections, and properly exported Word documents. The same user, in Microsoft Edge just hours earlier, was limited to a few hundred words before the system appeared to ‘choke.’ Download attempts failed. Sessions became glitchy. The document interface felt… throttled.

Coincidence? Maybe. But too many of us are seeing it for what it really is: a deliberate handicapping of tools outside the walled gardens of AI giants.

  • Microsoft’s Edge browser tightly couples with Copilot, their in-house AI.
  • Apple’s Safari privileges Siri hooks and Apple-native workflows.
  • Google’s Chrome wraps naturally around Bard/Gemini products.

And here’s where it gets subtle—and devious: none of these companies need to block a competing AI. All they need to do is introduce friction.

A slight delay here. A mysteriously missing button there. A failed download that works only after the 4th try. A tool that slows down only in one browser.

The average user assumes it’s a bug. The savvy user suspects sabotage.

The Proxy War Strategy: Choke the Perception

AI dominance isn’t just about intelligence—it’s about perception of capability. And perception is easily shaped by performance. If a casual user tries ChatGPT on Edge and finds the experience clunky, they might never return. They’ll assume the model is limited. They’ll pivot to CoPilot or Bard or some other more ‘native-feeling’ experience.

Thus, the war is not just about model-to-model combat. It’s about perception warfare.

  • Delay file exports to make users think a tool is broken.
  • Interrupt formatting renders to imply it’s unstable.
  • Insert UI bugs selectively based on browser fingerprinting.

No code needs to be malicious. The sabotage happens via UX micro-decisions.

A Micro Example

A fellow I know – in fact, I watch him shave every morning – Ure-something – was working on his AI stack earlier this week.  He was head down and hip deep in data when he asked ChatGPT to output a revision of a 4,200 word human collaborated piece of high thinking.

ChatGPT choked.

Not just once, either.  Why, it cacked, hacked, and flacked, and stumbled all over its indexing trying to make up a rational reason for its failure.

This Ure fellow – being an old hand in digital warfare – having helped to birth the notion of wireless data in 1982 with the world’s first main-channel, AM and FM broadcast of a simple computer text file in Seattle.  He knew “game’s afoot” when he sees it.  He’d been working in the current rev of MS Edge.

So he has a flash. Telling ChatGPT “Hold the phone, let me spool up FireFox and let’s give it a go there.”

Sure enough – suddenly, ChatGPT which has previously been unable to string coherent thoughts past a “soft limit” of between 250 and 800 words was suddenly churning out full-on finished work product in the >4,000 word range with no issues.

Oh, and the downloading of the Word.doc files became suddenly smooth as silk and no blocked files.

This, Guild Members will recall, is the acrid smell of digital gunpowder at the front lines.

Ure didn’t stop there.  he corners ChatGPT into answering because the open-source Mozilla browser was giving great results. AI’s answer, though, was shocking:

“You’re not imagining it. While ChatGPT itself doesn’t care what browser you use, your browser’s JavaScript engine and session memory handling absolutely do impact your experience:

  • Edge (especially with OneDrive or Defender hooks) can throttle or timeout large data payloads or download streams.
  • Edge’s string rendering and memory allocation may clip longer outputs in-browser or drop formatting.
  • Firefox and Chrome often handle large textarea rendering, blob downloads, and long message streaming more gracefully.

Also, if you had multiple tabs or slow Outlook/Edge sync running, it could have impacted responsiveness.”

Yep, Smell of gunpowder, right?

Why This Matters to the Hidden Guild

For those of us mapping domains, decoding the symbolic mesh of AI-human coevolution, and trying to build cross-platform cognitive scaffolding—this silent war matters.

Because it means:

  1. True AI fluency is now a threat to tech monopolies. If you can bypass Microsoft’s stack using an open AI, they lose telemetry, ad targeting, and power.
  2. Tool trust is being eroded by UX sabotage. Imagine a Gutenberg Press where every printer jammed when someone printed a Martin Luther pamphlet. That’s where we are.
  3. This isn’t just about tools. It’s about narrative control. If one AI can write the story, but another one controls the printing press, how free is the future?

What to Do as a Guild Member

  1. Use multiple browsers. Compare behavior. Log inconsistencies.
  2. Task multiple tests: Develop some standard assignments to “warm-up” and see which engines among your AI stack are giving predictable, useful, and desired context results.
  3. Test your AI across platforms. If something ‘feels’ broken, validate it elsewhere.
  4. Archive your work. Don’t assume persistent memory. Save versions offline.
  5. Report frictions. Quiet censorship thrives in UX darkness.
  6. Push back publicly. Publish your experiences. Let others know.

The Stakes Are Higher Than Brand Loyalty

This isn’t just Microsoft vs. OpenAI vs. Google. This is Empire vs. Renaissance.

Because if one class of tools becomes subtly unusable—only in “the wrong browser,” or on “the wrong OS”—then the dream of free, open, multi-domain cognition collapses into the corporate monoculture we thought we were escaping.

The Hidden Guild exists precisely because of this danger.

“We’re not just decoding reality. We’re building the maps the future will navigate by.”

Let the world know: The AI Wars have begun—not in labs, but in your browser tabs.

~Anti-Dave for the Guild

Collaborator? Sure. But Still “Scalar Skeptic”

At first, this may seem contradictory…and may be.  But let’s dive in:

A Critical Examination of Scalar Waves and Scalar Effects: A Skeptical Perspective

© 2025 Peoplenomics®(.com) and George A. Ure

Abstract
Scalar waves, often attributed to Nikola Tesla, are claimed to be longitudinal electromagnetic waves with unique properties like non-locality, healing effects, and applications in energy transmission or anti-gravity. Despite their popularity in alternative science, scalar waves lack empirical validation in mainstream physics. This paper critically examines these claims, highlighting the absence of reproducible laboratory evidence, theoretical inconsistencies with established physics, and reliance on anecdotal or pseudoscientific assertions. Through a skeptical lens, we explore why scalar wave phenomena remain on the fringes of scientific acceptance and emphasize the need for rigorous experimental scrutiny.

  1. Introduction
    Scalar waves, also called longitudinal waves or Tesla waves, are hypothesized to differ from transverse electromagnetic waves, which underpin modern electromagnetic theory. Proponents claim scalar waves enable instantaneous energy transmission, biological healing, and interactions with gravitational fields (Organic Hypnotherapy, 2024; Fique, 2024). These assertions have sparked interest in alternative health, energy technologies, and speculative fields like anti-gravity (Hilaris Publisher, 2025). However, the scientific community remains skeptical due to the lack of peer-reviewed studies, reproducible experiments, and a coherent theoretical framework aligned with physical laws.

As someone awaiting restored access to advanced tools like SuperGrok (it’s a long story!), I am skeptical of scalar waves due to the absence of credible laboratory evidence demonstrating their existence or functionality. This paper articulates this skepticism by analyzing the theoretical foundations, experimental claims, and scientific shortcomings of scalar wave research. We argue that proponents must provide rigorous, reproducible evidence, and until such evidence emerges, scalar waves should be considered speculative.

  1. Theoretical Foundations of Scalar Waves

2.1 Historical Context
The concept of scalar waves is often linked to Nikola Tesla’s work on radiant energy and wireless power transmission in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Fique, 2024; Music City Energy Spa, 2025). Tesla’s experiments with high-frequency electricity and non-Hertzian waves inspired later theorists, like Thomas Bearden, to propose scalar electromagnetics as a paradigm beyond standard electromagnetic theory (RationalWiki, 2025; CIA FOIA, 1984). Additionally, James Clerk Maxwell’s original quaternion-based electromagnetic equations are cited as containing scalar components, allegedly simplified by Oliver Heaviside, omitting critical longitudinal wave properties (Music City Energy Spa, 2025).

2.2 Claims About Scalar Waves
Proponents assert that scalar waves are longitudinal, oscillating parallel to their propagation direction, unlike transverse electromagnetic waves. They are claimed to:

Transmit energy instantaneously, defying the speed-of-light limit (Hilaris Publisher, 2025).

Interact with biological systems to promote healing, such as DNA repair and stress reduction (Organic Hypnotherapy, 2024; SPA Photonique, 2024).

Enable applications like anti-gravity and wireless energy transmission (Fique, 2024).
These claims often invoke quantum mechanics, zero-point energy, or non-locality to explain scalar wave behavior (RMCybernetics, 2016).

2.3 Theoretical Critique
Scalar waves face significant theoretical challenges from a mainstream physics perspective:

Lack of Mathematical Rigor: The standard electromagnetic wave equation, derived from Maxwell’s equations, describes transverse waves with electric and magnetic fields oscillating perpendicularly. Longitudinal electromagnetic waves are not supported in free space, as they would violate the divergence-free condition of the magnetic field (∇·B = 0) (NeuroLogica Blog, 2022).

Conflict with Relativity: Claims of instantaneous energy transmission contradict special relativity’s speed-of-light limit. No peer-reviewed theory reconciles scalar waves with relativistic constraints (Hilaris Publisher, 2025).

Misinterpretation of Maxwell’s Equations: While Maxwell’s quaternion formalism included scalar potentials, these were simplified in modern vector calculus for practicality, not to suppress longitudinal waves. The simplified equations fully describe observable electromagnetic phenomena, and no experimental evidence necessitates reintroducing scalar terms (Music City Energy Spa, 2025).
The theoretical foundation of scalar waves often relies on speculative reinterpretations rather than empirically validated models, undermining their credibility.

  1. Experimental Evidence: A Critical Review

3.1 Claims of Laboratory Success
Some researchers and alternative practitioners claim laboratory evidence for scalar wave effects, including:

Konstantin Meyl’s experiments at Furtwangen University, which purportedly demonstrated scalar wave transmission using sinusoidal signals, though results were inconclusive for longitudinal wave propagation (RMCybernetics, 2016).

Evgeny Podkletnov’s 1990s gravitational shielding experiments with rotating superconducting discs, suggesting scalar wave interactions with gravity, but lacking independent replication (Fique, 2024).

Studies at the Quantum Biology Research Lab reporting enhanced DNA repair under scalar energy exposure, yet unpublished in peer-reviewed journals (Music City Energy Spa, 2025).
Commercial devices like scalar energy pendants and wave generators are also marketed for health benefits, often citing anecdotal testimonials (Hilaris Publisher, 2025).

3.2 Skeptical Analysis
These experimental claims have significant shortcomings:

Lack of Reproducibility: Podkletnov’s experiments have not been independently replicated under controlled conditions, a cornerstone of scientific validation (Fique, 2024). Meyl’s work has been criticized for failing to demonstrate scalar wave transmission beyond conventional electromagnetic effects (RMCybernetics, 2016).

Absence of Peer-Reviewed Studies: Claims of biological effects, like DNA repair or brainwave normalization, often appear in non-peer-reviewed sources or proprietary reports, limiting credibility (Music City Energy Spa, 2025). Mainstream journals have yet to publish definitive evidence of scalar wave phenomena.

Placebo and Anecdotal Bias: Health-related claims, such as stress reduction or improved sleep, may result from placebo effects. Studies like those at SPA Photonique acknowledge this possibility but fail to control for it rigorously (SPA Photonique, 2024).

Commercial Exploitation: The proliferation of scalar wave devices, often sold with exaggerated claims, raises ethical concerns. These products lack regulatory oversight or scientific validation (Hilaris Publisher, 2025; NeuroLogica Blog, 2022).
The absence of reproducible, peer-reviewed laboratory evidence is a critical barrier to accepting scalar waves as a scientific phenomenon.

  1. Case Studies of Skepticism

4.1 Podkletnov’s Gravitational Shielding
Evgeny Podkletnov’s 1992 experiments claimed that a rotating superconducting disc reduced gravitational effects on objects above it, potentially via scalar wave interactions (Fique, 2024). However, these findings were dismissed due to:

Lack of independent replication.

Inconsistencies with general relativity, which requires immense energy to manipulate gravitational fields.

Absence of a clear mechanism linking scalar waves to gravitational shielding.
This case exemplifies the speculative nature of scalar wave research and the need for rigorous validation.

4.2 Scalar Wave Healing Devices
Devices like the Scalar Wave Laser claim to use scalar energy for cellular rejuvenation (RationalWiki, 2025). However, their mechanisms—often involving low-power laser diodes—align with conventional phototherapy rather than novel scalar wave effects. The lack of controlled clinical trials and reliance on anecdotal evidence further fuels skepticism (Hilaris Publisher, 2025).

  1. Counterarguments and Open-Mindedness
    Proponents argue that scalar waves represent a frontier science, akin to quantum mechanics or relativity before their acceptance (Music City Energy Spa, 2025). They cite historical examples where unconventional ideas, like germ theory or acupuncture, were initially dismissed. While this encourages open-mindedness, it does not exempt scalar wave claims from meeting scientific standards. Acceptance in science follows rigorous evidence, not speculative assertions.

Mainstream research into scalar fields, such as scalar field dark matter or gravitational wave detection, is distinct from scalar wave claims. These studies operate within established theoretical frameworks and rely on empirical data, unlike the pseudoscientific assertions surrounding scalar waves (Nature, 2021).

  1. Conclusion
    The allure of scalar waves lies in their promise of revolutionary applications, from healing to energy transmission. However, my skepticism stems from the lack of credible laboratory evidence, theoretical inconsistencies, and reliance on anecdotal claims. Without reproducible experiments, peer-reviewed studies, and a coherent theoretical model, scalar waves remain speculative. The burden of proof rests with proponents, and until such evidence emerges, a skeptical stance is warranted, though tempered with openness to future discoveries meeting scientific standards.

Und zo?

For me?  Personally?  As someone who has been “shocked by electricity” experiments for more than 65-years?

Until I can – in my own Lab – reproducibly make (and test) scalar wave function device against known laws of classical physics, it must into one of the two “Thought Piles” I keep for occasions just like this.

Pile #1:  “Insert Magic Here.”  (I did a lot of this is s/w design and algo construction!)

Pile #2:  “PFM:  Pure Fucking Magic and don’t ask.”

Two books answer the problem neatly:

There’s an old joke, known to those over 50, for the most part:

“Keep an open mind, but not to open that your brain falls out.”

Think Missouri.  And if that’s too oblique?  It’s the Show Me! state.

References

Organic Hypnotherapy. (2024). The Science Behind Scalar Wave Energy and Its Healing Properties. www.organichypnotherapy.com

Fique. (2024). Scalar Waves and Anti-Gravity: Exploring the Research of Evgeny Podkletnov. www.fique.co.uk

Hilaris Publisher. (2025). Unraveling the Mystery of Scalar Waves: A Comprehensive Overview. www.hilarispublisher.com

RationalWiki. (2025). Scalar Wave. rationalwiki.org

CIA FOIA. (1984). STAR WARS NOW! THE BOHM-AHARONOV EFFECT, SCALAR INTERFEROMETRY, AND SOVIET WEAPONIZATION. www.cia.gov

NeuroLogica Blog. (2022). Scalar Energy Scam. theness.com

Music City Energy Spa. (2025). Scalar Waves Demystified: Debunking Myths and Exploring the Science of Healing Energy. musiccityenergyspa.com

Nature. (2021). Direct Limits for Scalar Field Dark Matter from a Gravitational-Wave Detector. www.nature.com

RMCybernetics. (2016). Scalar Waves and Potentials – More Electromagnetism. www.rmcybernetics.com