**mass x mass = what?**

****

Colloquially Sir Isaac Newton has built a law of universal/mutual gravitation from a presumption about an apple 'drawing' the earth as it fell..........

**1/ An Artful Transition**

For non physics schoolteachers, glib transition from

*in the universe to*

**every other****particle***in the universe explains why Sir Isaac's law of mutual gravitation lacked educational substance over the journey.*

**one other****particle**

**2/ A Mass - Drawing Ability Anomaly**

For physics teachers, proclaiming 'gravity' in this manner was a contradiction of Sir Isaac's stated idea about the 'drawing' ability of matter being 'proportion of its quantity'. The product of two masses is never a proportion of mass perse. E.g. M + m = 10 units of mass.

For physics teachers, proclaiming 'gravity' in this manner was a contradiction of Sir Isaac's stated idea about the 'drawing' ability of matter being 'proportion of its quantity'. The product of two masses is never a proportion of mass perse. E.g. M + m = 10 units of mass.

Thus a simple doable experiment shows Sir Isaac had need to explain how the arithmetical operation within his law was not a contradiction of 'drawing' being a proportion of quantity.

**3/ The Opposite Direction Oversight**

For professional scholars, the simple mass - drawing ability anomaly within the structure of Sir Isaac's law of universal gravitation belatedly reveals a glaring internal arithmetical contradiction. 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 law of gravity. The inverse square law 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. He did not undertake reasoning about how or why the mass of the universe is conjoined through the product of any mass pair of the universe.

Simple arithmetical analysis shows Sir Isaac was originally underpinning his mutual 'therefore' (therefore the apple draws the earth as well as the earth draws the apple) on an opposite direction oversight. If picked up, 'readers' of Sir Isaac, like Albert Einstein, would have been facing 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. This opens up arithmetical knowledge of gravity fields being singular and not conjoined in some way or other with every other gravity field of the universe.

When applied to the earth and the moon, the actual calculation arithmetically explains a high tide under the moon. With respect of Sir Isaac's mutual proclamation, the important thing is the calculation shows gravity fields / inverse square laws to be discontinuous. Sir Isaac's proclamation relied upon inverse square laws being perfectly continuous from any one particle in the universe to every other particle in the universe.

At the two particle level, a locating of zero inverse square law magnitude 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 locating of zero inverse square law magnitude 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.

Simple as it is, this diagram is the standpoint to begin an understanding of the high and low tides of the earth from.

The problematic assumption Sir Isaac made three hundred years ago is the one of the moon's inverse square law reaching the earth. Arithmetic demonstrating the extension of the moon's inverse square law (inverse square law of m above) beyond the terminal point has never existed and, reasonably obviously, can never be made to exist. Once a zero descent rate point is located, the smaller of an adjacent pair of masses can no longer be a part of any considered mutual gravitation of every mass in the universe.

**4/ Mass x Acceleration = **__The Effect of Force__

__The Effect of Force__

The important thing for our physics teachers is Sir Isaac Newton has built a law of the universe on the presumption that every inverse square law in the universe could mathematically coexist inside of every other inverse square law in the universe. In contrast where the original journey to the moon was calculated to leave the earth's inverse square law and enter the moon's inverse square law is where Sir Isaac Newton's law of gravity fell apart.

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

As is or was relatively easily accepted by a junior school physics student, 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 acceleration of that mass.

What Sir Isaac has done with his second law is decide the acceleration due to 'gravity' that a mass causes towards itself is the equivalent of that mass

*(if matter thus draws matter it must be proportion of its quantity).*Then he has coupled this decided rate of acceleration with the inverse square law itself by dividing a quantity of mass with distance from its centre squared.

When this acceleration due to the gravity of mass quotient is inserted into Newton's second law for any two masses of the universe, 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 became one and the same.

Outside of the instances not being one or the same, the problems Sir Isaac and his immediate peers 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 shown to be a long term junior school malfunction. The question for current physics professors 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?

If those two questions are answerable, they need coherently teaching at the junior school level.

The need for both

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

****

5/ Second Law Conflict

5/ Second Law Conflict

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

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

The footnote being the second law reportedly began not with Sir Isaac but with Galileo in the previous century.

****

6/ The Constant

6/ The Constant

Prior to the discovery of Neptune, the aforementioned 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 actually demonstrates that 'gravity' is but a rate of acceleration. Not a force at all as is taught in our junior school physics classes. (When a physics schoolteacher says 'force due to the earth's gravity', he or she should be saying 'acceleration due to presence in the earth's inverse square law.')

**7/ Sir Isaac's Proportion**

Modern evidence would show the proportion Sir Isaac was originally assuming is between the product of quantity and surface area. Not simply quantity. For example, we now know the moon has 1/6 of the surface inverse square law magnitude of the earth. Whether we accurately know the moon's mass 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 astronomical 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, the earth does not accelerate in the slightest towards its descending apples. And that every particle in the universe is not attracting every other particle in the universe.

**8/ Worded Foundation Of Mathematical Physics**

The hypnotic pith of Sir Isaac's

*Principia*command of academia appears below. The main error and the reason of the need to take Sir Isaac's law of 'mutual gravitation' 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.*

Worth further noting for mathematical physicists = Sir Isaac's command begins in

*hope of proof.*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/ Accepted Proof**

Unless demonstrated otherwise, the only way to comprehend Sir Isaac's formula as proven is at the ongoing literature level. Schoolbooks passing it through the generations. Something like religious doctrines.