I love the discussion of free will because wherever it truly may be on the spectrum from 0–10 it tends to get held as an unexamined and unquestioned idol and pillar of certainty by almost every culture I’m familiar with. We pick rock stars, spiritual gurus, politicians, sports heroes, wealthy successful entrepreneurs, brilliant scientists and astronomers and even routine community role models and perform whatever contortions are necessary to fabricate a story about how their free will choices are a repeatable machine to their esteemed glory. We do the reverse for everyone from the homeless to the drug addict to the “them” we make our enemy or at best the scourge of the the “less than” or “undesirable” (usually along some blatant line like race, religion, addiction/mental illness, looks, sex, age or superficial habits of behavior, etc.). We do the Steve Job’s connect the dots backward with zest and liberal use of imagination to sustain our bias. Medium is full of articles that are formulas for reproducing the same idolized results through the implied free will to imitate. I’m neither arguing that free will is zero or ten on a scale of truth or law. I am saying that this essay is one of countless objective observations using our current best discipline (science) that says “not so fast”, “not so clear cut or certain”. Thank you Ella for the observation and suggestions of our cosmos behaviors as best we currently theorize them; science does have implications beyond physics, invention, material/technological capabilities, probabilities, discovery and mathematical formulaic mechanics. Subjective social and cultural fabrications often feel threatened by these implications — the historical record leaves little doubt about the pattern. We are not different, the Catholic Church put Galileo on trial by Inquisition for heresy and prohibited Copernican theory. We are the same species with the same preoccupation for our own beliefs and bias — orbital mechanics be damned.