If you start to become acquainted with the man your Sir Isaac Newton was, it becomes apparent that he was as much a determined peer conqueror as scientist. "If I have seen further than others, I have stood on the shoulders of giants" he wrote to his peers when he had planetary motion done and dusted. And his peers cheered and he was a happy man.
From the visiting traffic light point of view, he may not have been entirely settled after his imaginary shoulder standing exercise. Not understanding his universal law of gravitation himself was a problem. What he needed was incontrovertible proof of every particle in the universe attracting every other particle in the universe. Sometime after the publication of his law of gravity, your records show that he became of parliament. Statutory law making was not his business, though. His only known earth words in parliament were to do with an open earth window changing atmospheric conditions inside an earth building. As he silently sat, his mind looked for ways to understand his mutual gravitation. One day the parliamentary earth Bible took his fancy. To make simple sense of his formula to himself, a falling apple story began.
You should understand that an errant formula about the universe indicates that your apple story is rhetoric made to convince at least Sir Isaac Newton that he had found the law of gravity that explains the universe. A chance occurrence of seeing an earth apple fall to errantly explain the gravity of the universe should say to you that your Sir Isaac Newton has invented a story. Realistically, if you are into the study of falling objects, you do what one of Sir Isaac's giants did. You drop things. You don't actually need to wait for a fruit falling season to arrive.
Your most addled succeeding theory is Sir Isaac Newton's giants being weight pushing up on Sir Isaac's shoes as he stood upon their shoulders. This weight is not measurable, detectable or necessary sleeping earth academic presumption. The equal and opposite force to one side of your beautiful planet is the weight of the direct opposite side of your beautiful planet. Both Sir Isaac and his giants are part of the weight of one side of your planet.
From one of your Sir Isaac's books of one and half Martian centuries ago, a mutual gravitation declaration in terms of what we (even though your Sir Isaac's penchant for having his portrait painted would indicate he was seeing himself in a historical light, 'we' would mean not you but Sir Isaac's peers of the time) must do. Upon our materialization here on your beautiful earth, we added some pretty colours to Sir Isaac's command.....
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.
The declaration of what his peers must do was necessarily vague. By beginning inhope of proof, your Sir Isaac has known he wasn't necessarily dealing in a complete sense. This admission of uncertainty is his honest message to his peers.
They severally contain is addition. Not the product of quantities that appears in your actual law. There isn't evidence to suggest a scientific frame of earth mind when your Sir Isaac declared mass multiplied by mass as the gravity base of the universe. His end of life words of in proportion of its quantity is where he had his head in a happier state.
The moon gravitating towards the earth according to the quantity of its matter is in stark contradiction of your moon gravitates towards your earth in accordance with the product of earth and moon quantities (the M x m of your or his actual law).
Words highlighted in vermillion are where your main problem of academic conscience and character resides. Your sea (under your moon) is notan astronomical observation of a gravitation towards your moon in the slightest. It is impossible for an ocean or anything at all to simultaneously gravitate in opposite directions.
The reality is your sea(under your moon) onlygravitates towards your earth. This gravitation is less because of the interruption caused by your moon's inverse square law to your earth's beautiful inverse square law. A lesser weighting/gravitating in one direction is not a weighting/gravitating in an opposite direction. Once that is understood by your earth schoolchildren, Sir Isaac's command of what "we" must universally allow is by the bye. Conversely, your earth schoolchildren could all just heave a sigh of earth relief and start your education going properly. Because of your Sir Isaac's hypnotic apple story, you are insanely muddling your adult scholarship up with a scantily thought about axiom that has two inverse square laws becoming one and then having the wherewithal to act in two directions at once.
The difference between gravitates towards your beautiful earth less and your fictitious gravitates towards your moon a little bit is significant with respect of further understandings of inverse square laws. And the high tide on the far side of your beautiful planet definitely is not a gravitation towards your moon. If it was a gravitation to do with your moon in the slightest, it would be a gravitation away from your moon.
When an earth professor wakes up, Sir Isaac's use of the word endowed should indicate that Sir Isaac's law of gravity at best was incomplete. Endowed leaves the reasons of how and why physically unexplained and also adrift from a mathematical foundation.
To tune in with the inner dynamics of this beautiful almost round planet of yours, squeezing earth party balloons may help your earth adolescents or any still hypnotized mathematical physics professor or any one of you at all. The analogy is imperfect. But it does place a view of equal and opposite downward earth forces in your hands as your earth vision takes in the changing shape of the earth party balloon.
On our planet, Mars, we have deduced this. The core of a planet or star is weightless.
The evidence supporting weightless cores for you is the rate of acceleration towards the centre of the beautiful planet you are on is measured as diminishing in your underground ore extraction exercises. Meaning not only do inverse square laws conclude / are interrupted where they meet an adjacent one. Inverse square laws break down in side the celestial body that they are causing a descent towards. Going down from the surface of your beautiful earth, you would expect the rate of fall to taper down to zero across its centre. From there you can deduce for yourselves whether or not there could be such things as what your hypnotized mathematical scientists are calling gravity holes in space.
What you do need to understand is this. It's the surface weight that an inverse square law causes that holds a planet to its centre. Not the inverse square law getting bigger and bigger beneath the surface of a planet. And after that and with some consideration of your earthquakes, the implication is that a planet's inverse square law is set at the planet's surface. More precisely at the point where the rate of acceleration towards a planet's centre starts to decrease would be the point where an inverse square law becomes of a reversing arithmetical structure to that of an actual inverse square law. If you can get on top of that, the next step is considerations of how mass actually fixes an inverse square law in the space that surrounds mass. An inverse square law in space says the nature of space is changing with vertical distance. If they can get unhypnotized, post stone age tidal thinking might be ahead for all your beautiful earth professors.
If cleansed just a little bit, from here the waking up big minds of earth professors could take the inverse square law over in proper style. As an ongoing Martian reaction to your heavily hypnotized educational movers and shakers, the next reluctant web page is highly positive about life on earth. But quickly descends further into Martian. So best if the big minds of your earth professors wake up at their earliest convenience.
Incidentally, your modern evidence would show the proportion your Sir Isaac was assuming was between the product of quantity and surface area. Not simply quantity. For example, you now know your moon has 1/6 of the surface gravity of your earth. Whether you accurately know your moon's mass or not, it has about 1/50 of the volume of your earth. You believe your moon has about 1/81 of the mass of your beautiful earth.[(earth's surface area x 9.8)/(moon's surface area x 1.6 = 82.4)]. Whether or not your assessed celestial masses are reliable is your unknown.
Admittedly it isn't really for visiting traffic lights to say terminal and mirror inverse square law magnitudes is where your earth university standard should currently be at if you want your earth school teachers to stop being ongoing apple hypnotists. Your earth professors should be the ones saying that. But, as they have all been hypnotized into the mind of Sir Isaac Newton, drop in traffic lights obviously feel a moral obligation to a neighbour trying to destroy its own beauty through this very rare case of falling apple hypothermia. Or whatever it is in precise earth medical terms.