“The Major Advance in Understanding

October 21, 2016

The Hooke Newton inverse square law can describe ANY orbit in the relevant moving coordinate system. The acceleration is the convective or Lagrange derivative of the orbital velocity. The Lagrangian dervivative is, self consistently, the derivative taken with respect to a moving coordinate system.”

**For those who have not realized it yet: Ron has never done any real science. He has never explained a puzzling phenomenon, he has never carefully sifted evidence in order to clarify cause and effect. All that he did, even in his pre-breakdown days, was ‘glorified curve-fitting’; at best, the mathematical modelling of the results of others. He has carried that habit over into his crackpot life. He finds an analogy which works … up to a point and hides the failure of the analogy in other areas. He ‘double-counts’: he uses data to concoct a theory, and then uses the same data to confirm it! That is the biggest no-no in experimental science – quite contrary to the ethos of Bacon, which he claims to worship. As we have pointed out again and again in the past, it is all very well to find a model which simulates orbital motion (Hooke did it with a gutta-percha cone), but that alone is a sterile model. It leads nowhere. So we ask yet again, Ron, how does your ‘theory’ explain tides? How does it explain the Roche limit (the radius at which a large gravitating body will tear apart a smaller body which approaches it)? A real scientific theory, like general relativity, leads on to more and more unexpected phenomena which can be tested experimentally. Your ‘great work’ is just a joke which is laughed at by all but you and other crackpots.**

## Leave a Reply