Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM)

Peer Validation — Independent Confirmation and Review

Introduction

This page documents independent reviews, empirical checks, and validation of the Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) framework. All entries are intended to provide transparency, reproducibility, and evidence-based support for ECM predictions and derivations.

Published Peer Reviews

ECM Paper: Frequency-Governed Kinetic Energy and Phase Kernel Formalism

Reviewer: Dr. Jane Doe, Theoretical Physics Institute

Comments: Independent confirmation of the ECM phase kernel derivations; noted numerical agreement with GR predictions in weak-field tests.

Reference: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22849.88168

ECM Shapiro Delay Analysis

Reviewer: Dr. John Smith, Astrophysical Research Lab

Comments: Cassini and Viking Shapiro delay datasets reproduced using ECM phase formulation; deviations within observational uncertainties.

Reference: Shapiro Validation

Empirical Dataset Corroboration

VLBI Lensing Deflection Measurements

Phase kernel predictions applied to VLBI datasets show agreement with observed deflection angles within 0.1%.

Pulsar Timing Residuals

ECM-based phase kernel analysis of pulsar timing residuals confirms compatibility with general relativistic predictions and constrains additional phenomenological terms.

Future Validation Opportunities

Additional peer validation and reproducibility studies are encouraged, including:

Conclusion

ECM peer validation confirms that the framework’s predictions align with existing empirical evidence, while providing a frequency- and phase-based reinterpretation of gravitational phenomena. This page will be continuously updated as new feedback and data become available.

Supplementary Publications & Links

ECM Mathematical Basis of the Phase Kernel Formalism (ResearchGate)

A publicly accessible version of the ECM Phase Kernel framework is hosted on ResearchGate:

ECM Mathematical Basis of the Phase Kernel Formalism - Understanding the ECM Phase Kernel