A fresh start

It is true that there has been little success so far in exposing the limitations of the clockwork solar system and its tenuous links to astronomy via experimental sciences. I understand the allegiance to the historical icons, however, researchers would not be starting from the beginning but simply dropping a narrative and looking at dynamics with fresh eyes. For instance, the solar system's galactic orbital motion may influence variations in planetary speeds as the Sun is not stationary in this framework but moving in one direction whereas the planets change direction with and against galactic orbital motion.

The jewel in the experimentalist crown is Kepler's loose correlation between planetary distance and orbital period but this correlation says nothing about an individual planet's orbit, it just presents a relative correlation between planetary orbits -

"But it is absolutely certain and exact that the ratio which exists
between the periodic times of any two planets is precisely the ratio
of the 3/2th power of the mean distances, i.e., of the spheres
themselves; provided, however, that the arithmetic mean between both
diameters of the elliptic orbit be slightly less than the longer
diameter. And so if any one take the period, say, of the Earth, which
is one year, and the period of Saturn, which is thirty years, and
extract the cube roots of this ratio and then square the ensuing ratio
by squaring the cube roots, he will have as his numerical products the
most just ratio of the distances of the Earth and Saturn from the sun.
1 For the cube root of 1 is 1, and the square of it is 1; and the cube
root of 30 is greater than 3, and therefore the square of it is
greater than 9. And Saturn, at its mean distance from the sun, is
slightly higher than nine times the mean distance of the Earth from
the sun." Kepler

In more technical language, this low grade insight which can't be used for the inner planets, is expressed like so -

"The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets
is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the
orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are
proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." Kepler


Coming to the experimentalist view of this statement exposes something that is immediately wrong and a distortion of Kepler's statement -

"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean distances from the sun.... for the periodic times are the same, and the dimensions of the orbits are the same, whether the sun revolves about the earth, or the earth about the sun." Newton


The axiom that the Earth orbits the Sun is based on the motion of the Sun through the constellations in 365 days whereas the axiom that the Earth rotates daily is that the Sun appears to travel around the Earth. The experimentalist view is trying to replace an orbital observation (sun/earth through the constellations) with a daily rotational one.


For my part it would be just as productive if consideration was given to the perspective that the solar system's galactic orbital motion may influence planetary orbital traits from a top down view ( opposite to experimentalist view). It is also more important that genuine researchers be seen to undo a lot of damage by promoting new approaches rather than dealing with old errors and distortions.