**mutual gravitation undone**

****

Sir Isaac Newton decree about the mutual gravitation of the universe includes an unproven presumption about an apple 'drawing' the earth as it fell.

**1/ structural discordance**

Recognizing artful transition from

*in the universe to*

**every other****particle***in the universe is the first step towards understanding Sir Isaac's formula is the work of a confused academic mind. Dealing with one particle of the universe and every other particle in the universe simultaneously would have required a formula algebraically inclusive of every particle in the universe. The formula was only inclusive of two particles.*

**one other****particle**

**2/ multiplication - addition anomaly**

Proclaiming 'gravity' in this manner was a direct contradiction of Sir Isaac's stated idea about the 'drawing' ability of matter being 'proportion of its quantity'. The product of two masses is not a proportion of mass perse. E.g. M + m = 10 units of mass.

Proclaiming 'gravity' in this manner was a direct contradiction of Sir Isaac's stated idea about the 'drawing' ability of matter being 'proportion of its quantity'. The product of two masses is not a proportion of mass perse. E.g. M + m = 10 units of mass.

The 1 kilogram (above) observed to accelerate at a greater rate than the 4 kilograms means Sir Isaac's formula exists contrary to attraction being in proportion to quantity.

**3/ opposite direction oversight**

The simple mass - drawing ability anomaly within the structure of the law reveals the falling apple anecdote carries a confusion between addition and multiplication. For his part Sir Isaac

**did**specifically appeal to his readers about 'gravity' being an

**unknown**of his faculties.

A few centuries later, Sir Isaac's dilemma (about how gravity constantly reaches between masses) led to an Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity. Nothing travels faster than the speed of light was the new thinking of Albert's time. Therefore gravity would not act instantaneously. This allowed time into gravity and a 'space-time' curvature to be mathematically discussed around bodies like the earth and sun. Sir Isaac had left gravity at 'I don't know how'. In endeavours to explain accelerations towards mass, a 'space-time' curvature was now being considered as part of Sir Isaac's lack of understanding of an in between masses 'drawing' conveyance.

Albert had been advised by mentors not to challenge Sir Isaac's mutual formula. The inverse square law part and the existence of a gravitation constant were well proven. Following this advice, Albert presumed the basis of Sir Isaac's law to be the explanation of the universe at large.

Simple arithmetical analysis shows Sir Isaac was originally underpinning his logic on an opposite direction oversight. If picked up, 'readers' of Sir Isaac, like Albert Einstein, would have been entering Sir Isaac's 'gravity' knowledge gap (about how the gravity of the universe could constantly work through an apparent vacuum) from a

**discontinuous**inverse square law perspective.

When applied to the earth and the moon, the actual calculation arithmetically explains the induction of a high tide under the moon (link). With respect of Sir Isaac's mutual proclamation, the calculation shows gravity fields / inverse square laws to be discontinuous. Sir Isaac's proclamation about the universe was relying on inverse square laws being perfectly continuous.

At the two particle level, a termination of inverse square laws in between adjacent masses precludes an acceleration of a larger mass towards a smaller mass. And, when taken further, arithmetically shows a smaller adjacent inverse square law is contained within the larger of the adjacent pair.

At the two particle level, a termination of inverse square laws in between adjacent masses precludes an acceleration of a larger mass towards a smaller mass. And, when taken further, arithmetically shows a smaller adjacent inverse square law is contained within the larger of the adjacent pair.

This simple diagram is the overdue standpoint to begin earth's mathematical understanding of periodic rising and falling of ocean heights.

The problematic assumption Sir Isaac made three hundred years ago is the one of the moon's inverse square law reaching the earth. To be made sensible, Newton's law of gravity requires supportive arithmetic demonstrating the extension of the moon's inverse square law (inverse square law of m above) beyond the descent direction change point.

**4/ building a product of masses**

Sir Isaac Newton built a law of the universe on an unfounded presumption of every inverse square law in the universe coexisting inside of every other inverse square law in the universe.

The tidy up question is thus how Sir Isaac discerned mass multiplied by mass. The notable likelihood is unreasoned unification of his second law with itself.......

Sir Isaac's second law of motion proclaims a direct relationship between force and the acceleration a force causes. The greater the force applied to a mass, in a direct proportion the greater the rate of momentum gain of that mass.

What Sir Isaac most likely did with his second law is decide the acceleration due to 'gravity' a mass causes towards itself is the equivalent of mass

*(if matter thus draws matter it must be proportion of its quantity).*The inverse square law of diminishing acceleration applied to this decided equivalence has given Sir Isaac his second law rates of acceleration due to what he was terming 'gravity' at a particular distance from any mass in the universe.

From there Sir Isaac's law of mutual gravitation appears as a scalar mirror image of itself. But not as one empirical or self evident or coherent vector law linking every two particles in the universe together.

These instances of his second law ended up being one and the same.

Outside of the instances not being one or the same, the problems Sir Isaac faced were the product of mass and acceleration is a measure of the

**effect**side of his second law.

The second problem was one of presumption. Without observing the earth accelerate towards the apple, Sir Isaac was presuming the earth fell through space towards the falling apple.

Below the inner structure of Sir Isaac's law of gravity is laid out as a mistake. The question for current earth bureaucrats to be asking themselves is what other way could Sir Isaac have come up with a mass x mass drawing power edict?

We can understand length x length as area.

What is mass x mass?

How does mass x mass divided by area become a force?

The need for both

**action and force**to be conveyed through space was what Sir Isaac needed to explain. Actions are not conveyed through space. Actions (descents) are an occurrence in space.

****

5/return conflict

5/return conflict

The first real enthusiasm Sir Isaac's 'mutual gravitation' caused seems to have been the prediction of outer planet Neptune. Modern earth professors privy to exactly how this was done can decide if a mutual formula was actually used................

When analysed, the acceleration direction conflict between Sir Isaac's second law and his law of mutual gravitation explains what happened. Omitting to be forthcoming after the fact, Sir Isaac used his second law

**twice**to build

**one**law of gravitation.

****

6/ the constant

6/ the constant

Prior to the discovery of Neptune, the constant of Sir Isaac's formula had been calculated. The calculation was a side product of an attempt to weigh the earth using Sir Isaac's formula. However....

The units of the constant declare it to have only one mass. If it was the constant of Sir Isaac's formula, the constant would involve

**two**masses.

With the smaller mass being cancelled out, beyond Sir Isaac's life the on paper proof of the mutual formula is a setting of Newton's second law equal to itself.

The cancelling out in a Cavendish second law experiment demonstrates that 'gravity' is a rate of acceleration. Not a force. (When a schoolteacher says 'force due to the earth's gravity', he or she should be teaching 'acceleration due to presence in the earth's inverse square law.')

**7/ Sir Isaac's proportion**

Modern evidence would show the proportion Sir Isaac originally presumed is between the product of quantity and surface area. Not simply quantity. For example, earth professors now know the moon has 1/6 of the surface inverse square law magnitude of the earth. Whether the moon's mass is accurately known or not, it has about 1/50 of the volume of the earth. The moon has been assessed to have about 1/81 of the mass of the earth.[(earth's surface area x 9.8)/(moon's surface area x 1.6 = 82.4)].

Determining the masses of distant celestial bodies requires or would require careful thought. Using accelerations that aren't actually there may or may not allow for celestial mass calculations to be of meaning. The salient Newtonian point being an original moonshot recognition of the discontinuity of both fall directions in between bodies says, colloquially or otherwise, this planet does not descend in the slightest towards an apple. Also that every particle in the universe is not attracting every other particle in the universe.

**8/ worded foundation of mutual gravitation**

The pith of Sir Isaac's

*Principia*instillation of mutual gravitation into a subsequent earth mindset about the universe appears below. The main error and need to take it to task is highlighted in

**vermillion.........**

*Lastly, if it universally*

**appears****,**by experiments and astronomical observations, that all bodies about the earth, gravitate toward the earth; and that in proportion to the quantity of matter which they**severally contain**; that the moon likewise,**according to the quantity of its matter, gravitates toward the earth;**that on the other hand**our sea gravitates toward the moon**; and all the planets mutually one toward another; and the comets in like manner towards the sun; we must, in consequence of this rule, universally allow, that**all bodies whatsoever**are**endowed****with***a principle of mutual gravitation.*

*from Sir Isaac Newton's Principia.*

The use of

**= Sir Isaac's command beginning in hope of proof.**

*appears*They

*= addition. Not the product of quantities that appears in the actual law.*

**severally contain**Conversely,

**= Sir Isaac's contradiction of the moon gravitates towards the earth in accordance with the**

*the moon gravitating towards the earth according to the quantity of its matter**product*of earth and moon quantities (the M x m of his actual law).

*(under the moon)*

**Our sea**

**only****The interruption caused by the moon's inverse square law to the earth's inverse square law = this 'gravitation' is less. A lesser weighting/gravitating in one direction**

*gravitates towards the earth.**= a weighting/gravitating in an opposite direction.*

__does not__Including only the solar system in a universal gravitation announcement = forgoing entitlement to use the expression

*all bodies whatsoever.*****= what covers over Sir Isaac's lack of consideration about the arithmetical impact throughout the universe of oppositely directed inverse square laws.

*Endowed with***9/ conclusion**

**9/ conclusion**

Sir Isaac Newton's mutual force was a meaningless scalar union of two presumed opposing second law vectors. Not appreciating opposite descent directions in between particles was the folly of Sir Isaac Newton.