Setting aside the pseudo-intellectual tinsel that is a formalised version of 'The Time Machine', there is scope for consideration of absolute/relative space and motion which occupied everyone since it emerged a number of centuries ago.

The perspectives of direct/retrograde motion are the centerpiece of all considerations so when Isaac comes up with his own version at variance with actual astronomical principles, it provided me with a distraction and digression from a creative and productive path. Newton's idea of true and apparent motions is a paint-by-numbers thing which he called absolute/relative space and motion where observations seen from Earth are relative/apparent space and motion and conjectured observations from the Sun are absolute/true motion. This form of double modeling is a non starter for reasons that become obvious with familiarity.

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/031..._tezel_big.jpg

Kepler represented this motion over 16 years using the background stars as a reference -

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...retrograde.jpg


Newton imagines that it is a simple case of putting the Sun at the center and the retrogrades disappear so easy enough to account for his framework and again, at variance with all astronomical principles -

"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct,..." Newton


Of course referring Newton back to the original astronomical principles of a Sun centered system would only attract a very small audience leaving the relativists to their own devices but I see this as a positive thing.