>> This is quite detailed and insightful.  It is the focus of my "current" (often shelved) efforts to check results by step-by-step re-derivations (via at least two paths, possibly more in the future but I may never find the time!).  Lucas has by far the most general claims of all, essentially unifying physics in a [classical, straightforward] manner, with issues like gravity falling out easily and with a solid phenomenological description.

Lucas is working on a book that focuses on the quantum mechanical aspects, although he has numerous [sections, notes, papers in "unconventional" magazines, etc] that do address that.   He's getting pretty old, and I wonder if he'll finish his work.

>> This is a [fun, exciting] book, that formulates time-dependent equations (in contrast to Maxwell, Heaviside) to not only replace General Relativity (or aspects thereof) and goes well beyond that to more general equations.  I've read quickly through most of the book, but I'll have to wait until I finish my work on Bill Lucas's theory before I go through this step-by-step.

>> Dowdye derives the effective mass from purely classical physics.  He also points out that General Relativity only predicts the bending of light of the sun at one altitude above the Sun's surface, and fails everywhere else where there "should be" a measurable bending of light by the Sun.

>> Lucas has many notes on this...  He claims that the [strong, weak] nuclear forces vanish, just as gravity requires no additional explanation in the parts of his work that address General Relativity.

>> Actually, I have NOT yet started to go through step-by-step.  Instead, I read Holverstott's book in detail (comments to be posted to my website perhaps in a few months when I can get to it - I read the book a year ago!)  Randell Mills has his own theory of [gravity, anti-gravity], but I haven't looked closely, and won't until I finish with Lucas.

Many have called Randell Mills a fraud.  I guess that's always possible, and I cannot reproduce any of his [data, results] as that would require a big laboratory,  but I think Mills is probably OK, but that many of his critics really do look like frauds.

>>  This is a beautiful presentation, right or wrong, true of false.  Kaal uses Platonic solids as a basis for the structure of nucleus, and does far better at some predictions than quantum mechanics.  He also (if I remember correctly) predicts new undiscovered nuclei and their properties.  His concept may just fit well with Lucas's torus- based [electrons, protons] and Lucas's structures, but I haven't checked.  Perhaps it fits with Randell Mills as well, but that isn't as obvious.

Oliver Manuel - neutron repulsion & isotopic stability.  Oliver Manuel sounded a bit like a crazy doomsayer, but his papers were always interesting and thought-provoking.  He also had great comments about history and the atomic bomb.

• A. L. Peratt 1997 "Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasma" APSS 242, 1997 (3.3MB) http://plasmauniverse.info/downloads/AdvancesI.pdf
• A L Peratt (1,2)  W F Yao (3,4) 05Dec2008 "Evidence for an intense solar outburst in prehistory" Phys. Scr. T131 (2008) 000000 (13pp) stacks.iop.org/PhysScr/T131/014048
• Anthony Peratt, Dec03 "Characteristics for the Occurence of a High-Current, Z-Pinch Aurora as Recorded in Antiquity" IEEE Trans on Plasma Science v31 n6 p1192-1214

• 1. Montgomery Childs explores the idea of 'two worlds', the theoretical and the empirical, and how the SAFIRE PROJECT maintains a sharp eye on the line between.
• He also offers an intriguing take on SAFIRE methodology – involving a cigar, sailing, and a bit of wind.
• 2. Dr. Michael Clarage talks about his work with SAFIRE from a more philosophical perspective – what an empiricist might ponder outside the lab.
• He offers some intriguing if not startling observations about the astronomical and the biological, the dead and the living universe.
• 3. Montgomery Childs and Dr. Michael Clarage present a review of The SAFIRE PROJECT to date, which includes some new discoveries of the past year.
• 2017 Electric Universe FUTURE SCIENCE Conference in Phoenix Arizona
• 4. 90 minute SAFIRE PROJECT presentation, given at the 2017 Electric Universe FUTURE SCIENCE Conference in Phoenix Arizona.

>> Will SAFIRE find a low pressure, modest temperature (5,000 to 80,000 Celsius) route to commercial fusion energy, or lay the groundwork for something like that?  They are carefull not to claim fusion, but the do have anomalous elemnts at the end of their experiments.