Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.(Hebrews 11:1) ESV
When it’s impossible to measure absolute quantities, such as mass of the sun, then you use relative values: how much more massive is the sun than the Earth, for instance.
The relative values then become the numbers in your math, because you need numbers. In this case the hope is that it doesn’t matter whether your values are relative or absolute, the math is the same, so it’s okay, right?
Wherefore relative quantities are not the quantities themselves, whose names they bear, but those sensible measures of them (either accurate or inaccurate), which are commonly used instead of the measured quantities themselves.– Sir Isaac Newton, Principia Mathematica p. 82
Below is Newton’s rationalization of heliocentricity according to Kepler’s laws. Kepler didn’t prove heliocentricity. Newton’s Principia doesn’t deduce heliocentricity as a conclusion, it rationalizes it as a premise. The hope in this case is that heliocentricity is real, even though it’s unseen.
As the planet is differently situated in these conjunctions, its eccentricity is sometimes augmented, sometimes diminished; its aphelion is sometimes carried forward, sometimes backward, and its mean motion is by turns accelerated and retarded; yet the whole error in its motion about the sun, though arising from so great a force, may be almost avoided (except in the mean motion) by placing the lower focus of its orbit in the common centre of gravity of Jupiter and the sun (according to Prop. LXVII, Book I), and therefore that error, when it is greatest, scarcely exceeds two minutes; and the greatest error in the mean motion scarcely exceeds two minutes yearly.Sir Isaac Newton, Principia Mathematica PROPOSITION XIII. THEOREM XIII
Quoted in Newton & Kepler: Effect & Cause
Newton is describing relative motion, not heliocentricity. The observations he’s rationalizing were made from the Earth. The system he was observing was orbiting the Earth. Heliocentricity is a rationalization of the observations based on using it as the premise. Heliocentricity isn’t the observation. Heliocentricity is what’s hoped for.
Below Newton paves the way for SciPop to make up definitions of arbitrary words which then define the phenomena to which they’re applied. The hope in this case is that if we call a swirl of specks a galaxy, and then define galaxy as: a gravitationally bound system of stars, stellar remnants, interstellar gas, dust, and dark matter; then no one will know that a galaxy is really just a swirl of specks.
And if the meaning of words is to be determined by their use, then by the names time, space, place and motion, their measures are properly to be understood; and the expression will be unusual, and purely mathematical, if the measured quantities themselves were meant. Upon which account, they do strain the sacred writing, who there interpret those words for the measured quantities.– Sir Isaac Newton, Principia Mathematica p. 81-82
Newton goes down the rabbit hole of fantasy to such an extent that it had the effect of making people think that he was brilliant. When you read the fawning worship of him by his peers it’s clear that he thought he was smarter than God. Unfortunately his peers did too. Watch what he does in his rationalization of the self evident truth that the Earth is the center of the universe, which is held in its current stable state by a vast amount of unseen mass.
It is a property of rest, that bodies really at rest do rest in respect to one another. And therefore as it is possible, that in the remote regions of the fixed stars, or perhaps far beyond them, there may be some body absolutely at rest; but impossible to know, from the position of bodies to one another in our regions whether any of these do keep the same position to that remote body; it follows that absolute rest cannot be determined from the position of bodies in our regions.– Sir Isaac Newton, Principia Mathematica p. 85
- Newton suggests that the fixed stars are held in place by the presence of a massive body beyond them which we can’t detect.
- It can’t be seen, so he hopes that it’s not there even though its presence is clearly necessary.
- Whether it’s there or not we can’t determine if a body is in motion or at rest.
- He hopes that this doesn’t matter, but it means that it’s impossible to prove whether the Earth obits the sun or the sun orbits the Earth.
Below is Newton’s law of universal gravitation. The hope is that, since gravity is proportional to mass, supposedly, then mass is the cause of gravity. In this case the hope, that mass causes gravity, is completely wrong. Genesis 1:2 tells us that matter existed before gravity. Gravity was created on the second day.
A particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
This is a general physical law derived from empirical observations by what Isaac Newton called induction.– Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation
Newton took empirical measurements of effects and hoped that they were the cause of gravity. This means that Newton’s law of gravity is empirical, even though the cause of gravity is theoretical. As such, Newton’s law of gravity is an opportunistic rationalization of circumstantial evidence. Newton gave popular science (SciPop) the math it needed to remove Earth from the center of the universe and hell from the center of Earth.