It might be interesting to compare Mathisian physics with Randell L. Mills's GUTCP. They seem to have taken a similar approach.
Many thanks, Alan Smith ! Be advised that nothing brings out the internet trolls like Mathis's physics. It's almost enough to make one believe "they" are trying to bury his work...
As for the comparison to GUTCP, well I am not that well versed in Mills's model so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt. I feel confident that Mills' empirical findings are compatible with Mathis's physical theories. But I find Mathis's theory superior to and more satisfying thatn Mills's. While it's true that Mills calls his theory a 'classical theory' and Mathis's approach is also classical, the similarities pretty much end there. From what I've read of Mills, I would say that Mathis goes much further in delivering a classical theory, and by that I mean he is much more concerned with actual physical mechanics that Mills is. For all his talk about classical theory, Mills still uses math that is often heuristic and that tends to obscure mechanics.
On top of that, Mathis has also gone back and corrected certain equations, many of which Mills incorporates in his work. Just to give one example, Mills accepts the Bohr radius but disagrees with the quantum Copenhagen interpretation of the probability cloud. Mathis also disagrees with the Copenhagen interpretation, but unlike Mills, he rejects the use of point particles in physics as well as the notion of electron orbits as altogether unmechanical. In addition he has shown numerous errors in Bohr's equation and reworked it, showing that (among many other important things):
"the radius hidden under Bohr’s bad math is the radius of the electron, not the radius of the orbit. And the spins belong to the electron as well. But we should have known that long before. All the angular momenta have to apply to the electron, not the orbit. If the orbit was the primary cause of the various fields of the electron, then the orbit itself would show a magnetic moment and an electrical field, and so on. And if it did that, the atom wouldn’t be neutral, it would be an ion. Besides, we know that free electrons also have electrical fields and magnetic fields. So it cannot be the orbit that has all the angular momentum. The angular momentum and the magnetic moment belong to the electron, so the radius must also."
I could go on and on, since his numerous corrections have enabled him to unwind and explain one scientific mystery after another with surprising clarity. But just to give one example, his corrections to the Rutherford scattering equations enabled him to solve the proton radius puzzle. As I said in my paper, before standing on the shoulders of giants, he first peered over their shoulders and checked their work. The mistakes he found will astound you.
Mathis and Mills are different right from the start, but they share the classical approach. Mills uses Newton, Maxwell and Einstein as written in the textbooks (except for a fix of the Schwarzschildmetric used by Einstein) and Mathis goes even further back. As I understand it Mathis is purely mechanical and Mills is mechanical + electrodynamical (is that a word?).
What I want to underline: physics is just about models and models use our current mathematical framework. Some models are good, some models are bad and some models are better than other models. “Better” is always viewed in terms of descriptive- and predictive power and of course complexity. In my eyes it is a great tragedy that mainstream physics has narrowed its mind to a small subset of models. Saying it with respect to optimization theory: In my eyes physics is now stuck in a local minimum and great efforts lead only to a small increase in performance. In this case a procedure called “backtracking” is necessary or one should have tracked multiple possibilities in the WHOLE search space right from the start. I hope when Mills proves his suncell and (parts of) his theory correct it will start a revolution in the way (mainstream) research is organized.
Edit: Mills also has an explanation for the proton radius puzzle. The proton can absorb photons and that changes the protons radius