Prepared by: Soumendra Nath Thakur Date: July 21, 2025

Introduction

This report offers a focused, point-by-point comparative analysis between the reformulated physics approach proposed by Terry McMahon in his 2025 paper, "Quantum gravity, special relativity & unification QGSM," and the Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) framework developed independently. Both approaches challenge the foundations of relativity and quantum field theory, offering energy-centric alternatives to spacetime geometry and abstract force-carrying entities. Despite different terminologies, the two share foundational similarities as well as critical divergences.

Refer the Table Image "Comparative Analysis Table.jpg"

Conclusion

Terry McMahon's reformulations and the ECM framework arrive independently at converging conclusions: spacetime curvature is not fundamental, time is emergent from energy behaviour and photons are not massless. Where McMahon uses "running parameters," ECM formalizes transitions using mass-displacement (ΔMᴍ), effective and apparent mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ, Mᵃᵖᵖ), and frequency (f) as foundational. This comparative insight opens the door to potential synthesis or mutual reinforcement of both models under a shared principle of energy-centric realism.