The "Two body" problem. Hey you low IQ "three body problem" physicists. How come you skipped the "two body" issue? and didn't even consider 4 to infinity bodies? Oh, muah ha ha.

Read up on it. The “three body” problem is a real issue for physicists. Oh, they take their work seriously. Cross every t and don’t forget the sprinkles. They are THOROUGH or they try to convince us that they are, all the while telling us common folk that multiverses exist when they don’t have a single dot or a single “hello” from the other side. But trust them, it is acceptable to discuss “multi-verses” in physics circles. They stooped so low they are floating in shit and proud of it. Incomprehensibly the opposite of how a scientist thinks.

But, for all their damn seriousness, how come they skipped over the “two body” problem? Ah, what is the “two body” problem? Here’s a clue. I’ll name two bodies. You “three body” problem people tell me what the ridiculous issue is. First body, Earth. Second body, a bullet. Figure it out yet?

Shoot the second body, the bullet, straight up and that bullet will always come back to Earth, if you don’t shoot it with infinite speed. The bullet will always come back to Earth. There can never be a speed for which the bullet achieves this mysterious “orbit” aside from an infinitely fast speed. Remember that this is a hypothetical problem and there are only two bodies in this hypothetical example. So, no matter how far the bullet is from Earth, since Earth’s gravity is the only possible influence on this bullet, the bullet must eventually return to earth.

That’s the “two body” problem. Now, when they were working on the “three body” problem, they were apparently very focused and really hoped that their math would all work itself out. They finally had to go with, “it’s a problem. All our complex math can’t figure out shit.” Oh, they couldn’t possibly imagine that maybe, er, 4 bodies could exist? Or five? Or the gazillions of bodies that exist between the Earth and the next star since even tiny meteorites affect the final calculation? Oh, you’ll again just ASSUME you know exactly how much each tiny meteorite weighs, you’ll assume it’s exact density and let’s not forget that you’ll also assume you know this tiny meteorite’s exact location as you’re doing your calculation.

When they started realizing the massive complexity induced by nonstop changing gravitational forces from three separate bodies all variably affecting the other two bodies, at extremely low levels from moving bodies, why couldn’t they realize that each additional body (to this hypothetical problem) beyond three bodies would also increase the complexity and probably at a greater rate of complexity increase? They didn’t learn to count to ten in pre-school? What made them focus all their genius math energies at just three bodies? Sheer stupidity and the desire to keep math relevant, when higher math is rarely ever relevant?

This would have been the perfect time to zoom back and look at the big picture and realize what all math has always been about, a summary of the gazillion events that have occurred. A gazillion nitrogen molecules hits the side of the noisy clanging tank and now you have a pressure of 3.1 atmospheres. Or is it 3.11005. Or does it matter. Or did we just kind of guess what the pressure most probably is and we will never know the exact amount, but our math is a good approximation of the average force of all those nitrogen molecules in that particular tank on that particular day with that particular weather. Yes. That’s all math is. A summary. An average of many similar events and assuming other interfering events aren’t contributing to the real-world numbers. Math never tells you how. Higher math just tells you that you’re dumber than he is, or that’s what he wants to tell you.

Math will never get you away from assumptions, which makes an ass out of just you, not me, since I know the stupidity of math. Math works at the lowest levels. One apple? Sure, it’s one apple. Rotten at the core but you won’t know until you’ve had half of it. So, is it one apple or is it half? Or 43%? Oh, but the math question clearly said “one apple.” They assumed. That’s what math always is. Not only problematic because it makes nonstop assumptions. Math is only a summary and never the how Not only a problem because it’s only a summary, but because those who proclaim math as the answer always play that game of “you don’t get it, that’s how stupid you are and unless you can explain my math stupidity to me in my math terms, I will never acknowledge it.”

Math can’t shake these three problems. 1. Assumptions nonstop. 2. Only a summary of events and never an explanation. 3. Math experts are certain they are smart and everyone else is dumb. Since they can’t seem to shake themselves of these issues, I’ll keep hammering these points home. Until people realize the stupidity of higher math. But their claims of math success and accuracy are outsized, even for their inflated egos.

The most ridiculous analogy that I’ve heard from a physicist, showing off math’s precision, was him describing how accurately they had to calculate some space probe’s trajectory and compared it to shooting a basketball from New York and the ball going into a basket at the Staples center in LA. Space probes often have an internal heat source and small rocket engines they can turn on to alter trajectory.

So, the correct analogy is more like this. We have a military drone with tons of on-board capability with three different GPS systems in case one crashes or is inaccurate and we are going to take off from New York and have this drone land on the basket at the Staples center in L.A. We have a team of professionals keeping track of exactly where the drone is at all times and if there’s a bit of a wind that throws it off course, we will constantly adjust our flight plan. Now, who is impressed at this feat? No one. Because we adjust as we go. As do almost all space probes that need to hit a certain narrow window. What’s so incredible? Not much. Why the ridiculous analogies about how precise their math calculations are when they get to constantly adjust as they go? Because they want to pretend their work is infinitely harder than it is. Basically just lying to build themselves up.

There are a lot more issues in math so far as scientists are concerned. The best math formulas on earth are accepted as best because they were “curve fit” properly. With change in a variable is graphed, sometimes phenomena, when measured and graphed, take on different shapes, sometimes a straight line, a simple curve, a complex curve, you name it or show it or graph it out, there will be a “curve fit” math formula that easily approximates your unique curve.

Enough racism against math proponents for now. More to come later. Back to the two-body problem looked at in a different way. Proxima Centauri is the nearest star to our sun and is located over 4 light years away. In order for an object the size of Oumuamua, the first recognized interstellar rock/meteorite/mass, to travel two light years from the solar system around Proxima Centauri, it had to be imparted a velocity that was great enough to travel two light years of distance and maintain enough velocity to be able to start the downhill gravity path towards our sun. Of course, half-way may not be the most accurate assumption in calculating exactly how much kinetic energy had to have been imparted before the interstellar rock is pulled more by our sun than by the star it originated from.

Because what this means is if the Oumuamua type rock doesn’t have quite that speed, if it only reaches one light year away from Proxima Centauri when it reaches zero velocity relative to the position of Proxima Centauri, then the mass that will have the greatest attractive force on this Oumuamua type rock will be Proxima Centauri. Then the Oumuamua type rock will slowly start RETURNING to Proxima Centauri and will never become an interstellar alien ship that visits our solar system.

Ah, make fun of the stupid math behind a theory of general relativity that provides complex math curve fit formulas that are supposedly a tiny bit more accurate at predicting gravity effects by so clearly illustrating that an Oumuamua type rock can never leave the star it originated from because the energy required to give it sufficient velocity to travel two light year’s worth of distance from its star would also vaporize that same rock and so it would never be in the shape and size and form of an Oumuamua rock. This theory of general relativity that is Einstein’s attempt to “explain” the gravitational force merely kicked the can down the road. Sure, the physics community ALLOWED Einstein to claim the mass distorts space and time throughout the universe, a concept that had never been used in science before and absolutely no attempt to even explain how that would occur, not even the beginning of even the most lame attempt to explain how mass would have this effect on space/time.

The scientific method starts with a hypothesis, a mechanism, that tries to connect the purported cause with the observed effect. The ball rolls down the hill. The apple falls from the tree. Not a surprise to anyone. So Einstein warps all space/time and there is now a steeper hill towards the large mass. But that STILL does not even begin to explain why the ball rolls down the hill, which was the initial mystery, was it not? Einstein STEEPENS the space/time hill towards the large mass. IGNORING the fact that he still has not even begun to make a guess as to WHY the ball rolls down the hill, whether less steep or more steep. Sure, he might take offense with how I’m describing his dumbness. But how am I wrong. If he provided complex math to better predict how gravity works, he’s just curve-fitting his formulas. Even Einstein was hoping someone would find a “mechanism” to explain the gravitational force. He was camouflaging his lack of a scientific hypothesis with very silly and very complex math. And again, math is ONLY a summary.

Does that mean I subscribe to the Harvard astrologist’s best guess for what Oumuamua is, an alien spaceship sent to investigate whether humans really are spending almost all their time gazing into a screen that is a complete waste of a life? That’s why that alien species decided to disguise their spaceship like an asteroid rock?

Or is it more likely that Einstein and Newton’s math formulas describing the gravitational force failed to be properly curve fit because they didn’t have sufficiently good real-life data except the tiny effects of gravity on apples? Both of these lauded but still very frail human men failed to even start the scientific method which begins by making a proper educated guess as to the mechanism behind the gravitational force. Stating that the gravitational force is a result of space/time warpage by large masses is a very superstitious statement because it’s akin to stating that the Braves won the baseball game because one die-hard fan happened to bring a white rabbit’s tail and keep it in his left pocket. Yes, he may have done that. No, it is not the reason they won the ballgame and it will be impossible to show how having that rabbit’s tail is connected to the team winning the game.

And don’t forget. The theory of general relativity didn’t explain gravity very well at all. If it DID explain the gravitational force so well, why did they have to invoke “dark matter?” Oh, there doesn’t seem to be enough mass in galaxies to account for all the gravitational force present so they invoked a new theory and said the “missing matter” is “dark matter.” Or infinitely more likely, Einstein’s complex math was all wrong and when you are presented with phenomena that is not easily explained, invoking magic and then covering up the weakness of that invoked magic with complex math is probably the least favored way to actually find the truth. Almost always, we have found that when faced with mysterious phenomena, trying to break down the issue and having a hypothesis that explains a simple mechanism has been a much more effective way to get to the truth. Going big with explanations and failing to try to connect the purported cause to the accepted effect is the very opposite of how the scientific process starts.

Was Einstein at least intellectually honest to himself? Sadly, no. A huge reason why his ridiculous theory that warped all space/time was so easily accepted? It pretended to predict the precession of Mercury’s rotation around the sun a bit more accurately than Newton’s simple formulas. But was that just math and the desire to curve-fit until his formulas actually got that part right? Well, what do you think? When that issue with Newton’s formulas not predicting the precession of Mercury correctly and when every mathematician knew of that issue BEFORE Einstein ever released his “theory of general relativity.” The average person thought Einstein’s formulas PREDICTED the precession of Mercury amazingly correctly. But the average person had no idea that this was an extremely well-known problem BEFORE Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Why would Einstein not make absolutely certain that his complex formulas correctly predicted this issue with Mercury’s precession perfectly? I would bet anything that some versions of Einstein’s complex formulas did NOT predict the precession of Mercury correctly and obviously Einstein would then THROW THOSE OUT and only keep the formulas that DID predict the precession of Mercury correctly. Then, Einstein literally told a huge lie by an act of omission and by failing to correct the public’s misunderstanding of what his formulas did predict. It can’t be called a “prediction” if it was already a well-known issue and if he continues to curve-fit his complex formulas until that precession issue is correctly dealt with. That is NOT a scientific prediction. It’s simply intellectual DISHONESTY.

Einstein really did believe in a “cause and effect” world and determinism. He insisted on it as is clear from his quote, "God does not play dice.” He so disliked the non-deterministic world of quantum physics that he referred to it as “spooky action at a distance.” Well, every galaxy that we’ve been able to study has a massive black hole near its center. And that black hole (using their logic) doesn’t let anything out. But that black hole DOES exert an influence on every star and object in that galaxy of at least a 100,000 light years in diameter. Didn’t Einstein himself create the spookiest action at the furthest distances with his claim that large masses distorted space/time at massive distances? How were HIS theories NOT producing the spookiest actions at the most massive distances? Criticizing quantum physics for invoking “spooky action at a distance” yet unable to see that that was all his complex math formulas did do too. Hypocrisy at its worst. No, there was no rigorous rational thought by Einstein. No, there was no intellectual honesty in his work.

I have an infinitely easier and straightforward and simple mechanism for gravity that doesn’t require the distortion of all space and time in the universe. It even predicts exactly which planets/moons/asteroids or masses will have rings. And it’s actually a HYPOTHESIS that can be tested and will predict the path of asteroids/meteorites/comets much better than the current formulas which means we will be able to better assess which potential threats to earth (asteroids) we should take interventional action against to prevent massive death and destruction on earth.

That’s why truth matters. Because truth is simply a better understanding of reality which, in this case, allows a better prediction of asteroid orbital paths and less human death. So, physicists, put your egos aside. You all know that Einstein’s theory of general relativity and quantum physics are contradictory and a nightmare issue for the future of physics. The best way to unify the two contradicting theories? Put them both in the trash bin because that’s where you will see how similar they both are. And yes, I’ve been teasing about this discovery of the mechanism for the gravitational force for months now. I will publish it here soon.