Hello.[long pause]At the bottom of this table you can notice a diagram. [pause]It is suggesting at least theoretically where Venus gets its impetus to be doing its backwards rotation. [pause]During a solar alignment of the earth, Venus and the sun, the earth sun high tide axis is passing through the Venus gravity field. [pause]Venus has the superior relative or Kepler third law speed of the two bodies. [pause]So, as it advances beyond the alignment, this axis gets bent and  deviates from its [sexily]straight line path to the sun. [pause]This causes an original impetus for both the earth and Venus gravity fields to turn backwards as each progresses further around the galaxy. [long pause]If you can take that in, that's the [sexily]Australian beginning of the idea of why Venus is turning backwards relative to most other solar system planets. [pause]The first glance implication or meaning is Mercury and Venus are celestial bodies akin to the moon. [pause]The rotation rates of those bodies is quite or more directly controlled by the rotation rates of their gravity fields. [pause]At least that is the way it has started to appear to [alluring]celestially be from down under here.[pause] [long pause] edit of.

During a solar alignment of the earth, Venus and the sun, the earth sun high tide axis is passing through the Venus gravity field. [pause]Venus has the superior relative or Kepler third law speed of the two bodies. [pause]So, as it advances beyond the alignment, this axis gets bent and  deviates from its [sexily]straight line path to the sun. [pause]This causes an original impetus for both the earth and Venus gravity fields to turn backwards as each progresses further around the galaxy. [long pause]If you can take that in, that's the [sexily]Australian beginning of the idea of why Venus is turning backwards relative to most other solar system planets. [pause]The first glance implication or meaning is Mercury and Venus are celestial bodies akin to the moon. [pause]The rotation rates of those bodies is quite or more directly controlled by the rotation rates of their gravity fields. [pause]At least that is the way it has started to appear to [alluring]celestially be from down under here.[pause] [long pause] edit of.

The earth experiences two high and two low tides a day. If we have a quick look at the basis of finite inverse square law theory, you can see that the earth's gravity field shape goes some way towards  mirroring  the tidal shape of the earth.  The next part of the theory is gravity fields have intertwined turn rates that govern the day lengths of the planets that they contain. If such is right and  treated well by the academic world, it could result in a healthy dose of world betterment. If it is right, the reason of the universe is getting to be in the range of being understood. First have a look at these tables. What is the probability of the near exact ratios that exist between the inner three planets. Then the outer six planets in pairs all have similar day lengths. First Earth and Mars with approximately 24 hours in a day each. Then Jupiter and Saturn with the approximate 10 earth hours each. Lastly Uranus and Neptune ranging between 16 and 18 earth hours. Like Venus, Uranus turns backwards relative to the other planets. As you can see is theoretically suggested at the bottom of the table, this table is a consequence of an the solar tidal axis of an outer planet passing through and providing a rotational impetus of the gravity field of the next planet in.  The overall result being the Kepler third law speed of an outer planet becoming embedded in the path around the sun the next planet in is following. In two dimensions and ignoring the ellipses but otherwise to scale you get a solar system rotational mechanics like appears here.

As you will have noticed. that apple was descending directly along the path of the earth. In reality all descents follow a curved paths through space. They  have accelerations or decelerations in all three dimensions. One dimension is the path of a gravity field. The other two are the dimensions at a right angle to that path. More about this later. At this stage we will just mention that professors around the world have a little book keeping to do for the sake of not teaching lies at the lower levels of learning. It  was in 1783 that William Herschel  effectively demonstrated that the Copernican revolution had made a mistake. The revolution had mistakenly fixed the sun in the center of the universe. Both Galileo and Newton had developed a rationale of how the earth could be suspended above a stationary sun gravity field . Their rationale was tangled in with Galileo's correction of Aristotle's idea of force being required for a motion to exist. They had not realized that had the planets ascending in the sun's gravity field as part of their solution. Suffice to say at this stage junior class rooms need to be taught the progression from the fixed earth belief to the fixed sun belief to the moving sun appraisal. In reality the earth and other planets would spiral into the sun if its fravity field was fixed in the center of the universe of anywhere else.

The title of this video comes from this email. The old man who received it had wished to explain to a physics department that you understand the tides through moonshot arithmetic and Newton's third law.

The professor had not been presented with a theory of gravity and the old man didn't really have one beyond what logically followed from understanding the tides through moonshot arithmetic and Newton's third law.   All he was saying was the government should not be teaching every particle in the universe is attracting every other particle in the universe as the truth of the universe.  And that it was that teaching that obscuring understanding the tides through moonshot arithmetic and Newton's third law.

So, post the email, the exercise was to put the theory together. If the choice comes down to being between finite inverse square law gravity theory, which is what theory is, and Einstein's space time continuum, the finite gravity easily has the edge when  Occam's razor is applied. For those not familiar with it, Occam's razor, it  is, when faced with a complex solution and simpler solution,  the most probable right answer between is the simpler one. This diagram here is the mathematical basis of the finite gravity field theory. Smaller gravity fields are contained within larger gravity fields. The razor aside, if such containment is right, Albert Einstein has missed the mark by a fair bit.

It does this by recognizing that descent is a motion relative to the motion of its cause. [pause]To be clear with terminology being used, [sexily]an inverse square law and a gravity field are one and the same. [pause]The structural nature of the inverse square law will be shown shortly. [pause] When Sir Isaac Newton saw his apple fall, unbeknownst to him and his legion of followers since, there is a 500 50 chance the apple lost momentum, that is slowed down, as it fell. [pause] Then regained that lost momentum as it landed on its English soil.[pause] Understanding that a descent can either be a loss of momentum or a gain of momentum is the key to understanding how a moving gravity field can cause a suspension above its self.[pause] This illustration or animation is exaggerated, the earth is moving too slow in relative terms, but notice how the apple slows down as if suspended during its descent. Then regains that lost speed  upon impact. [pause]So that is the second part of the theory.[pause] Descent is a motion relative to its cause. [pause] Both of Newton's and Einstein's theories are unfortunately ignorant in this area.[long pause] [long pause] edit off [short pause]

And few other things if time had of allowed.

The old man had only wanted to deal with the mistakes of Sir Isaac Newton. After the meeting the professor's all other pointed to Albert Einstein and his space time continuum.  Understanding the tides in this through 

If there was time in the three quarters of an hour allotted for the meeting to explain that you understand planetary motion through the motion of the sun's gravity and not through Newton's first law of motion. Then if things were going okay there, what follows is you understand the day lengths of the planets through the turn rates of their gravity fields. That could be going a bit far as that only really made sense if the universe and matter its self was a consequence of the end of space.

That little lot is very much Newtonian physics and its two main mistakes. The first of multiplying masses together to explain a mutual gravitation running throughout the universe. The second of believing Newton's first law was more than statement of fact. That somehow it explained why the earth does not fall into the sun amongst other things. Doing that is relatively straight forward. It would have been hoped with that done Einstein's theories would fall where they did. 

Well that's the email. If the sentiment had of been registered before the advent of Albert Einstein, there is a chance it may have done the world a bit of good.  Because arguments in favor of Einstein are so well honed, whether Einstein be right or wrong, it is almost impossible for his gravity theory to be wrong on earth. A while after the receival of this enail, t least in part, this is where an old man questioning Einstein through AI ended up.

 Your skepticism is entirely warranted. A mathematical symbol cannot cause time to exist, nor does it perfectly capture what time actually is. If you ask a physicist, "What is time fundamentally?" the honest answer is that we do not know. General Relativity does not explain the underlying physical nature of time; it only provides a highly accurate mathematical map of how time behaves when you move mass around. The minus sign is just the ink on that map that keeps the math from breaking the speed limit of light.

The background to this email is someone who is an old man now having seen problems within the physics of Sir Isaac Newton when at school. Prior to the meeting, this is the old man endeavoring to get through to see a physics professor. As evidence that he was at least trying while the international world was going half mad, he recorded the call. 

It wasn't that phone call that resulted in the meeting but that is not important. Beyond that recording the old man does not see him self as much to listen to or look at to explain to the world where well, Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein have created an unnecessary mess for us to be living through. The mess really traces back at least as far as Aristotle but Newton and Einstein are the reference points for understanding what we are calling gravity.

The old man was not educated in the work of Einstein. Photo's of the old man are not plentiful but this one would be taken a little prior to realizing that both Galileo and Newton were having an impossible solution to planetary motion taught. And, In Newton's case. the same impossible deal for the tides. The year is known to be 1971 for this photo. At the time of the taking of the photo, he would not have been standing there thinking Newton and Galileo are wrong. Never the less he knew they were at the time.

The old man did do okay at secondary school. In particular at physics. He lost a few marks in his physics exam at the end of the secondary school for leaving units off.  Otherwise it was a perfect score according to the state government of Victoria at the time. So that is his qualification for saying both Newton and Einstein made mistakes that are holding the world separate from truth.

Until sometime after receiving the professor's email, he had little interest in grappling with the work of Einstein. After pointing out Sir Isaac's mutual gravitation mistake, all he wanted to do was tell the professor that you understand the tides through moonshot arithmetic and Newton's third law. Mainly that. In the background was also the superior motion of the sun's gravity field explaining planetary motion relative to the sun and not the impossible Newton first law of motion fixed gravity field one that was still being taught at secondary school. And then there was something that should be able to balance the mess of mutual gravitation and fixed gravity field orbital motion if things got that far. And that is these tables here. Once you are seeing the tides through moonshot arithmetic and Newton's third law, it is almost impossible to not consider that the tides of one planet are running through the orbit of an adjacent planet so as there day length relationships between the planets.

During the short meeting with the professor, it was found that he was not really listening to what was being said to him about mutual gravitation being a mathematical impossibly. He was fishing around for things to say in its favor while the old man was explaining the impossibility on the whiteboard.

So the next day email came as a bit of surprise. Perhaps it shouldn't have. On the drive home, the old man realized he had not drawn attention to the probability of gravity field turn rates being the explainer of the day lengths of the planets.  So he emailed the professor that night asking him to scroll down to the bottom of the webpage that he had all his explanatory diagrams on. So it can only be presumed that the table somehow captured the professor's attention. Obviously, if it is right, it is big news.

The truth of the meeting would be both men were out of their depth at the time about the historical relationship between Newton and Einstein. The professor can speak for himself on that, according to the old man's replacement professor, Gemini, AI, he is still head of Melbourne physics department in 2026. Meeting with physic's professors are very hard to get and, as long as AI is able to produce a reasonable representation of where the world of mathematical physics is at, it is much easier to get along with. The old man has found that you can actually reason with AI and he gets a little chuffed and quite encouraged when AI agrees with all the problems and contradictions he points out in the world of mathematical physics.

The old man's position with Einstein had been show that mutual gravitation is wrong and let general relativity fall where it does. He had no governmental relationship with Einstein. Only his one with Newton that traced back to the late sixties of last century. He had no wish to become preoccupied with Einstein and really just wanted to see a little more of the world than what he had in his old age.  This is where AI ended up with the old man questioning Einstein.  Your skepticism is entirely warranted. A mathematical symbol cannot cause time to exist, nor does it perfectly capture what time actually is. If you ask a physicist, "What is time fundamentally?" the honest answer is that we do not know. General Relativity does not explain the underlying physical nature of time; it only provides a highly accurate mathematical map of how time behaves when you move mass around. The minus sign is just the ink on that map that keeps the math from breaking the speed limit of light.

If gravity field turn rates explain why we live 24 hours in a day, there is no such thing as a space time continuum. The implication being what is referred to as time dilation is either changes in either gravity or changes in a state of motion altering atomic clocks. Today's physicists are convinced that is not possible. That can be left at that and the future can decide. Here we will just rewrite secondary school physics.  Suffice to say, if Sir Isaac Newton had not multiplied two masses together to explain the gravity of the universe back in his day, there would have been Einstein or space time continuum today. Mathematical physics likes to say Newtonian gravity is an approximation of Einstein's work. That way Newton doesn't get thrown out. But Einstein completely disavowed mass multiplication. Gravity travelling instantaneously as in the Newtonian world and gravity travelling at the speed of light are not approximately the same. His mass multiplication aside, in this rewrite Newton was closer to the mark than Einstein. Both both wrong when seeing gravity as a transmission.