The only things visible from Earth was the sun, planets, asteroids and comets--NO stars (nebula, galaxies or anything else, if I had included them). I was rather puzzled by this, and took a look at what the program code was doing, to see why.
What happens is that the gravitational limit of the sun is about 2.1 light years, based on Larson's calculations. The nearest stars are the Centauri system, with Proximia Centauri being 4.3 light years away, with a gravitational limit of about 0.27 light years, so it is well outside the gravitational limit of our sun. Alpha Centauri, being another G2 star, has about the same gravitational limit of 2.1 light years, but is 4.4 light years away--again, right at or just outside the gravitational limit of our sun (hard to get exact numbers, as actual mass is unknown--only estimated by astronomers).
The gravitational limit defines where the 3D, inward motion of gravitation STOPS (discrete unit postulate), and the outward progression takes over. Objects outside the gravitational limits can therefore have NO INTERACTION with each other, because they are being carried away from each other by the progression (like one raisin in a cake cannot interact with another, as the cake expands while baking). Also, the magnetism carried by the IMF (Interplanetary Magnetic Field) would stop at the gravitational limit, as there would be no particles to interact with past that point to maintain it.
Photons remain fixed at an absolute location in the natural reference system and likewise do not interact with each other, since they do not move scalarly inward or outward. Photons emitted by a star can be carried outward to the gravitational limit, because it is in a 3D, gravitational reference frame. But once they reach the gravitational limit, only the progression of the natural reference system exists, so the photons cannot "hop" between locations to cross that "outward" gap, to reach another star--and because of that, light from other stars cannot reach our solar system or our planet, based on Larson's description.
And with this situation, the nearby stars SHOULD be flying away from us, at the speed of light (the speed of the progression), which they are apparently not doing. Larson attempts to solve this problem in Universe of Motion by coming up with the idea that the mass of the aggregate creates an outer gravitational limit that binds the stars together, using the force of gravitational attraction, where you multiply the masses together to get the net force. I have diagrammed this situation:
This solution, though "mathematically correct," is NOT conceptually correct. Any structures outside the gravitational limits CANNOT INTERACT, as they are being carried apart. Therefore, there cannot be any "mass multiplication" to produce a secondary gravitational limit, which in essence, converts the outward progression between stars into an inward, equivalent space motion. To me, that seems like "cheating."
In the diagram, "absolute locations" between stars are indicated by a, b and c. If something that gravitated existed at any of those locations, it would not interact with stars A or B, but start to build a star on its own. Nehru describes this situation in his paper on globular clusters. A gravitating mass AT the gravitational limit, would still be pulled into the star, as there would be a net, inward motion between that mass and the star. If I were to place a photon at "b", it would just sit there, and never get any closer to A or B because it stays at the same, absolute location in the natural reference system...
So why can we see stars in the night sky?
What I have come up with is two possibilities:
- Light actually moves faster-than-light, so it can overcome the progression and move across the gaps between gravitational limits (seems unlikely).
- Larson's calculation of the gravitational limit is wrong and it is about twice his calculated value. With that situation, Alpha Centuri and Sol would be sitting right at the gravitational limit of each other, and would achieve a condition of stability for the same reasons that two atoms maintain a stable, chemical relationship, such as Na and Cl in salt. The difficulty here is that you would need to have "positive" and "negative" stars to maintain that chemical equilibrium, which may certainly be the case with A component (red giant) and B component (white dwarf) stars, which act like a positive and negative charge. But the problem with that is when those stellar components rejoin the main sequence and there is no longer an obvious difference between them--then the larger star should consume the smaller, which again, does not appear to be observed, as multiple star systems are common.