The subtle but important difference between velocity and gravity

I continue to progress through the science of Nostradamus although the first draft will have its weak points.  It is peculiar for old physics to envision, but super-symmetry provides a fairly clear path to predicting the future.
I have mentioned that I solved the Zeno Paradox, but I don't want to introduce my own.
Hence, I want to talk about the subtle but important difference between velocity and gravity.
Both of these involve CT1 but they have different effects.  One moves things forward, ensuring every point in the universe is constantly changing position after ct2, there being no movement between ct1 and lower points except in terms of solution order.  The other pulls things together and in that solves the issue of the paradox and if you're in a hurry to see it, you can order book 6, no one is stopping you and if you wait, its coming.
Anyway, we look at things that come from before our time begins and we ask how can we know how truly old it is.  The answer is that the age is related from our perspective but unrelated to any common thread.  The photons, moving at the speed of light, necessarily have clocks that are still, so if they are concentrated into matter, only then do they have clocks and we apply our clock as the receiving matter to them to give them an age based on their solution order becoming closer to ours as the ct1 sharing has fewer intermediary sharing states.

https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/higgs/5/?lid=a022e2b0-0967-479e-a6f6-c2df06febe0f

I want to talk about this course which is an important one to me.
The idea is that it will deal with the "Standard Model of Particle Physics," a complex fallacy trying to give durability to perceived reality.
There are three parts of a Model: 1) formulate the principles of a theory, 2) develop the mathematics needed to solve the equations of motions of the system under study, 3) test the model. 
The model of AuT is prepared in the same way.
If the principles of the theory are flawed and it cannot be fixed the mathematics becomes an exercise in trying to explain away unwanted observations.  This is true of the methodology used to find the HIggs Boson.  The observers want to find it so bad, they create a model that suits their purposes.
In the words of the lecture:
"A theory without predictive power is of limited use... Disagreement with experiments implies that something is wrong in the theory. Sometimes the disagreement can be cured by minor adjustments of the principles, but sometimes a radical change of paradigm is required."

Here is the first major flaw in the presentation: "...subatomic scale, where the laws of classical mechanics no longer apply."  We can propose this principle: "Any theory which fails between levels is flawed."

In a comment the problem faced by mathematics, such as mine, is set out graphically in a quote; Max Planck - said "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

Oh goody, the next post will take this: why Newtonian dynamics is a good starting place to understand the scientific methods used in particle physics and show why it is a terrible place to start.

Remember, available on Amazon: