I have no problem with Newton's absolute/relative space and time
insofar as they represent a consistent picture of heliocentricity as
he saw it and although the Newtonian astronomical working principles
are incorrect in contrast to the descriptions provided by
Copernicus,Kepler and even Galileo ,every single person here still uses
his description of planetary motions as valid.

It is a thankless task to provide the real explanation for the adoption
of Copernican heliocentricity and,more importantly, its working
principles against the flawed Newtonian conception and the sidereal
working principles that proves now only to be a calendrically driven
convenience for optical astronomers.It is easy to see how an .986 deg/3
min 56 sec axial coordinate was hammered into an orbital displacement
but this is just one of many tamperings that highlight the
errors,misjudgements and misconduct of that era.

Genuine investigators will eventually find themselves bypassing the
20th century excesses and return to Newton's misjudgements in order to
provide an more fluent description of the structure and motions of
planets and solar systems insofar as the major obstacles exist at the
juncture where the solar system is no longer isolated from the effects
of its motion around the galactic axis.

I enjoyed the documentary,even while exactly knowing where the
obstacles exists, because the problems were presented in a manageable
way.I will tell anyone who cares that they cannot,I repeat cannot come
to satisfactory working principles while retaining the original
Newtonian heliocentric outlook in contrast to the correct
Copernican/Keplerian framework.Regardless of what anyone thinks or
says,empiricists retain absolute/relative space or that peculiar
Newtonian quasi-geocentric outlook and I assure them,it is simply not
worth the effort to retain it.People are looking for heroes with real
accomplishements rather than clawing celebrity for its own sake,more
often than not the true scientists are those who present documentaries
of the connection between life and surrounding conditions or the
magnificence of extreme astronomical and terrestial nature without
padding it with speculation.The documentary the other night was the
first sign that a more balanced approach highlights what is substance
and what is not and long may it continue.

[ External conditions are never good for balancing responsibilities
towards concerns for the astronomical heritage and those of everyday
existence but these things are luxuries compared to real pressures of
men who work to feed their kids so I have no reason to complain and
neither does anyone else here. I have come to appreceate that genuine
investigators do engage in the same struggle to surmount the
limitations imposed by 17th century conceptions and have bypass the
exotic 20th century rubbish which will always shout for attension and
the next phase is to present things in a less cluttered and a less
hurried way.]