Over the past few years, myself and co-authors have been intensively working on a book which has finally been published:
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/q0333#t=aboutBook
The first half of our book is about physics theory. The second half applies our results to make sense of various experimental topics, including LENR, superconductivity, nuclear structures.
The book's ambition is grand: to put theoretical physics back onto the right track, correcting some foundational errors that slipped in over the past 80 years. We consider that it has been a historic error to declare Maxwell's electromagnetism invalid in the microscopic scale (referred to as "renormalization") and to declare general relativity invalid in the microscopic scale (referred to as "wavefunction collapse"). We aim to understand the electron and its interactions without violating Maxwell's equation or the equations of General Relativity, and without introducing ad-hoc assumptions.
On the other hand, our work fits into the historic trend of progressing from particle-oriented concepts to wave-oriented concepts. In the middle ages, light was thought to be a stream of "light balls". The first wave perspective was introduced in the 19th century, based on results of light interference and refraction experiments: then light was thought to be a wave of "aether particles" which were supposed to fill the vacuum. Proponents of the aether particle theory refused to teach Maxwell's equation for several decades until it became too uncomfortable: all radio engineers were using Maxwell's equation, while the aether particle theory remained useless for practical purposes. Thus the following light model was introduced in the 20th century: light was thought to be a stream of photon particles (particle perspective), which magically appear to engineers as Maxwell's equations based electric and magnetic field (wave perspective). It may take 100 years or 1000 years to completely develop the correct wave perspective based understanding, but there is no question that this process is in progress.
Our work fits into this historic progress. We anticipate that it will take practical applications for the next step to gain wide recognition and acceptance: that is why the 2nd half of the book is dedicated to the applications of the theory.
Obviously, our work is not for everyone. There are people who endorse many of the paradoxical "modern physics" ideas. These people believe that the reason their feet does not sink into the ground is because the atoms of their shoes and the atoms of the ground play a ping-pong game of photon particles. They believe that they move in the vacuum filled by a "Dirac sea of positrons", which remain undetectable and their infinite energy magically cancels out. They believe that neutron decay begins by the emission of an 80 GeV particle (which violates both energy and momentum conservation), and that 80 GeV particle disappears by emitting a 10 orders of magnitude lighter neutrino particle. They claim that although electrons have electric field energy, and although Einstein's E=mc^2 relation implies a corresponding mass, the electron mass is only generated via some weird ping-pong of >100 GeV Higgs boson particles. They might write negative comments in this thread.
Our aim is not to argue with the particle-perspective oriented people, but to address those who are interested in a simplified and contradiction-free formulation of field theory.
