Ok, some guys (or maybe "we" is just one guy) got together and decided to invent an explanation for the propagation of light, starting with visible light. There is some acknowledgement, by these guys, that visible light is part of a much larger spectrum. Indeed, any alternative (or invented) theory will need to explain this, as Maxwell first did with parts of the spectrum at much longer wavelengths than visible light, or for that matter, than infrared which is the domain of molecular vibrations. If the new ideas don't have a way to recover Maxwell's "laws" of electromagnetism, it's effectively useless to science. Which is to say, if you decide to start with the visible part of the spectrum, why not start with the radio part? More to the point, explaining why visible light is slowed by dense fields of matter should not have a useful solution in terms of charge-free, and spin-free fields. You will need to alter the laws of physics (or perhaps be in a virtual universe of some kind, devoid of charged particles, say). Lastly, someone who claims that a theory needs to start with a mathematical skeleton has it backwards, a theory starts with observations and mathematical descriptions of them. Newton's theories started that way--it took him a while to get the math right, and he didn't come up with an explanation of molecular vibrations impeding the propagation of light, although he was an early spectroscopist.