Still, where is this thread leading now? - Brevity please!
Three points:
1. Tides contridiction ........
2. The inertial paradox..(slide 2 attached.....a separate but related tides issue)
3. gyroscopic contridicion.....
"as for discarding Newtonian mechanics" I did not say they through everything that newton ever said about mechanics out the window any more then they through everything Copernicus or Galileo said out the window.........They still use some of all of those..However, Newtonian Mechanics does not and is not what describes or defines....motion (absolute v
relative which Newtonian Mechanics distinguishes) nor does MS use newton to explain gravity, inertia, or acceleration, or how those things work wrt bodies and or each other in celestial mechanics ... The point to all of this is the diagram I attached earlier..(I will attach it again here so no one has to hunt for it) succinctly makes my point #2 in my previous postings.....(you can't have a detectable inertial reaction both detectable and not detectable there at the same time wrt the exact same things)......& thus highlights one aspect of the the tides acceleration issue in Point # 1 ...
