There are now two types of investigators out there,the dignified people
who see a genuine conflict with the ad hoc solutions of dark energy and
dark matter in accounting for visible observations andf the other
exotic multiple universe type guys associated with the early 20th
century concepts .

No problem that you consider the exact location of the obstacle to be
boring,as Newton sold the shop in explaining Keplerian motion by
isolating the solar system thereby shortcircuiting any other external
influence, such as the solar system's galactic orbital motion, he
forces you into piling ad hoc 'dark' setpieces on top of each other .

Nobody can do anything without first correcting the original Newtonian
solution for heliocentricity and the way he overlaid his ballistic
agenda on Keplerian orbital geometry.Until then scientists may as well
appeal to multi dimensional branes or heaven knows what to account for
visible phenomena.I have done what is neccessary to point out just how
limiting the 17th century attempt to explain Keplerian motion was and
far from being boring, Newton poves to be one ingenious operator in
manipulating data,incorrect though it may be.

It is not a matter of being wrong with conclusions,the underlying
roots of the working principles of Newton do not go further than
Flamsteed and as such,provide a quick fix or ad hoc solution for
Keplerian geometry while shutting off any other influence.If the
genuine guys can live with that then they undo their good work in
framing the contemporary problems in a decent way.

It is not my problem,at least not any longer,it belongs to those
genuine investigators of celestial motion and structure and good luck
to them.