Indeed. In Denmark we had a well respected professor a couple of years ago. She was made famous because of a report on the renewal and development of braincells in rats. A report which was sadly shown to be a fraud

And there I was thinking that the Nordics were squeeky clean.
Publish or perish!
правда

You're challenging Douglas Adams on the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything: your theory seems to say that it's "!" and not "42"!

 I don't believe in the existence of aliens.

All major gravity phenomena can easily be extracted only from a beam of light in a gravity field with zero knowledge of G or even any knowledge of modern physics mass size.  All gets simpler when one understand what mass really is

Extraction of the Speed of Gravity (Light) from Gravity Observations Only

Still - why not in a physics journal? You're expecting here a firiendly audience? You're wrong.

Still - why not in a physics journal? You're expecting here a firiendly audience? You're wrong.

step by step my friend! Here we work for money, if you want a friend, buy a dog!

Exactly, if you want to be beloved and admired, buy a dog. Any research in physics should be presented to the audience of physisists. If you're right, you'll gain fame. But even when you're wrong, you'll force them to revise their assumption, something what must be done permenently in science.

In mathematics, it's seen as an opportunity when a theory breaks down. For example, that's when delta function were made mathematically respectable i.e distribution aka generalised functions. It doesn't always succeed to make intuition respectable. just think of _fill_in_any_adjective_here_  probability.

Exactly, if you want to be beloved and admired, buy a dog. Any research in physics should be presented to the audience of physisists. If you're right, you'll gain fame. But even when you're wrong, you'll force them to revise their assumption, something what must be done permenently in science.

You can't blame poor Collector for the fact that nowadays physics is broken.
Besides, his posts give me an excuse to ramble about my bad experience in science! When I came to an allegedly once renowned London university I've been told in my face that to make a career it only mattered to suck up to influential people and that to get a grant I needed to be good at bullshit - it didn't matter how intelligent I was. It lost all sense to me. My PI didn't understand the basics of physics in her field and tried to use their authority to force me to follow the nonsense they produced - which was easily falsifiable unlike Collector's theories. I literally (and in good faith, though with undeniable pleasure) massacred their research project (sponsored with millions of pounds afaik) when they consulted it with me. They even got some "medal in physics" for that I told the HoD that that place was an abode of mediocrity and I didn't want to work there. Only Japanese still do some physics these days... All the rest is the business of leeching money: grants, journals, rewards, sponsors, marketing, etc. Collector at least has some passion for what he's doing - or is it just for Schwarzschild radii and models of the Universe

+1000

+1000

Unary operator?

Newton's gravitational force formula was originally 

\(F=\frac{Mm}{r^2}\)

It has been corrupted since the 1800 hundred with the so called Newton's gravitational constant, that Newton never invented or used. Actually to include a gravity constant makes the mass definition incompatible with Newton's foundation. 

and thence we conclude the least particles of all bodies to be also extended, and hard and movable, and endowed with their proper vires inertia. And this is the foundation of all philosophy.

The gravity constant is never needed (except to fix the incomplete mass definition of modern physics), it is only causing confusion. 

Newton did not Invent or Use the so-Called Newton's Gravitational Constant G. Big G is not Needed in Physics; it Has Mainly Caused Confusion!

The mass one can extract (and that Newton extracted) from his formulation is superior to todays mass definition that needs mystical constants to fit observations. 

Will 2nd edition have a CD with C# code?

Will 2nd edition have a CD with C# code?

C# very likely, as top language, CD is out of fashion I think.. more likely it will come with a finger or two 

PDP 11/20 compatible I hope