In an effort to reach some conclusion, why not pick a simple situation that suits both parties and each performs a calculation to support their views along with an explanation. What the point of the argument is has become a bit lost.
When I was at school many years ago we did simple experiments using trollies on an inclined plane attached to a ticker tape. We simple measure space between the dots to determine the velocity and hence acceleration or deceleration.
The laws of motion are something that are well understood so to refute them would be quite some undertaking. Newton’s 3 laws of motion have been taught in every elementary physics class since physics classes were introduced. If someone is claiming to have found a problem with one or all of them, then please explain which of these laws are in error.
It's how the laws are applied and told which is the key to why we are duped.
Let's look at them.
First law:
An object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.The law in itself is meaningless in one aspect whilst pretending to be something in another.
In reality none of it works.
An object cannot ever be at rest because there is always forces acting upon it and it, them. It's called atmosphere.
An object can never remain in motion at a constant velocity unless a force is constantly applied to it, so the claim that it's UNLESS a force is acting upon it, is a pointless waste.
However, if we go into fiction territory, this is when Newtons supposed law works, because people are now forced to confront the space ruse and the vacuum ruse that supposedly allows an object to be at rest or move in a frictionless void of nothingness, which brings us to another major issue.
If that's the case then there cannot ever be a force applied in the first place for anything to resist a motion or to change a motion.
The law is a nonsense.
Second law: Second law: Force on an object is equal to the mass of that object multiplied by the acceleration of the object: F = ma. So basically you apply energy to a dense mass and accelerate that mass or move that mass.
In simple terms what you put in as energy you get out as equal energy. Nothing more and nothing less.
Simple enough as long as it's used in the reality of the physical world we actually live in.
Third law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.In
reality it's no different than the second law in terms of what it means.
Basically you only get out what you put in, in equal terms.
Your action creates and equal and opposite reaction to that action.
Whatever energy you apply you reap the reaction of that applied energy equally.
This works fine and likewise to the second law in a real Earth environment.
Fictional space and rockets and such use these laws in the wrong way and in a deliberately duping way with the pretence of equal and opposite reaction to action without the use of atmospheric pressure.
It's clear nonsense and that's why these laws get abused.