An astronomer has to descend to a political level to deal with what is called Newton's 'gravity'. It is not an academic principle and never was so what is left is not simple but basically crude, two different things.

The empirical agenda is scaling up without limits so that the limits of analogies applied to large scale celestial phenomena are removed and in its place is a experimental/universal concept that robs both of their effectiveness.

For Newton, the Earth attracts the apple, the moon attracts the tides, the Earth attracts the moon and finally the Sun attracts the Earth hence his overreaching notion that his followers exploited but never really understood -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

It is all downhill from there as the fudge to fit it into the astronomy of Copernicus and Kepler is wickety,wackety,woo even though that route can be traced also.

To be fair, I thought that at least a few people, not necessarily theorists, would be brave enough to tackle the issue instead of wanting to appear the best boy in the class but unfortunately no such courageous individual has come forward. That leaves only the usual slogan chanters who have long since lost their effectiveness as contributors to this newsgroup.