That is what they mean by inertia.

The Moon and the Sun pull on the earth, causing the Earth to fall toward them as though in orbit around them. The Moon and the Sun pull on the near side of the Earth more than on the center of the Earth.

The acceleration of the near side of the Earth is greater than the center of the Earth, the inertia of which leaves it a meter or so farther behind. This means that the near side “rises” up relative to the center, causing a tide on the near side. They pull on the center of the Earth more than on the far side of the Earth. The acceleration of the center side of the Earth is greater than the far side of the Earth, the inertia of which leaves it a meter or so farther behind. This means that the far side “falls away” relative to the center, again causing a tide on the far side. No gravity in any other direction needed.

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/tutorial_tides/tides03_gravity.html
“Over the rest of the globe gravity and inertia are in relative balance. Because water is fluid, the two bulges stay aligned with the moon as the Earth rotates”
The sun has slightly less affect, about 46%. When the moon is at 1/4 or 3/4, The sun and moon cancel each other out creating very little tide. (neap tides)
“The moon is a major influence on the Earth’s tides, but the sun also generates considerable tidal forces. Solar tides are about “half as large” (other articles express it as 1/3 as compared to the moons 2/3 influence) as lunar tides and are expressed as a variation of lunar tidal patterns, not as a separate set of tides. When the sun, moon, and Earth are in alignment (at the time of the new or full moon), the solar tide has an additive effect on the lunar tide, creating extra-high high tides, and very low, low tides”

So inertia causes the bulge on the far side of the earth during new moon… inertia as explained in one article is the water wanting to go in a straight line while the earth curves around the sun and the moon. At full Moon wouldn’t that inertia be combined with the pull of the moon to create a much larger tide? During full moon and new moon the tides are at their strongest but are about equal on both sides of the earth, the difference between the two is 3%… That’s it. Because the nightside part of our planet is further away from the Sun than the noon side, The gravitational effect is slightly less… That accounts for the 3% difference.

Edward said;
” They pull on the center of the Earth more than on the far side of the Earth. This means that the far side “falls away” relative to the center, again causing a tide on the far side. No magic needed, no antigravity needed”

When you say “falls away”, I say “falls up” A contradiction. Falling up against earths gravity.

My argument is that it should be, because gravity has only one direction, “very LOW tide” that should be occurring (minus the 3%) on the Darkside of the planet during the new moon. Is there something else happening? A obvious but undeclared force in play?

Particularly when you factor in that low tides is as much below sea level as high tides are above sea level. Inertia again?
I can except a drop in of a few inches as the high tides remove volume, displacement of water someplace, but so much water removed below gravitational Sea level where the gravity affect is neutral, doesn’t hold muster with me.
Perhaps I should put a weight on a sensitive scale with a Time-lapse Camera to show if the weight goes up and down with the rotation of the planet during new moon. (i’m not aware of any gravitational effect inside the space station as it passes between the earth and the moon… Does objects suddenly migrate across the cabin?)

We discussed major earthquakes occurring at low Tide during the new and full moon, another example of an unknown force increasing stress is at 90° to the gravitational force. (graviton enhancement?)

I can’t prove anything, these are just thoughts that don’t make sense to me. Apparently because there are so many search results, others have thought of it too. I’ve been unsuccessful at finding an explanation, just variations of the same inertia.
I should also point out that the tides are higher near the Arctic Circle like the cook inlet near Anchorage or the circular Bay in northern Canada. Strange.
I Remember a mechanical engineer in college Who explained how there was more gravity the further north you go. when he drove Long haul truck of parts for Fords made in Canada, truck weighed in at 50,000 pounds at the factory, the maximum amount which was checked at the waystation going into the United States at just under 50,000. By the time he arrived in Mexico where the parts were assembled, the truck weighed a considerable amount less.
I know, it’s possible this can be contributed to the centrifugal force of the earth spinning… or it could be that the poles are always at 90° to the gravity affect creating a “low tide” affect continuously.
That may also explain why many galaxies are flat.
I’ll have a day off soon, I will look into it deeper then.

Lee Stevenson is correct: the tides on Earth are well understood.

The Moon and the Sun pull on the near side of the Earth more than on the center of the Earth. This means that the near side “rises” up relative to the center, causing a tide on the near side. They pull on the center of the Earth more than on the far side of the Earth. This means that the far side “falls away” relative to the center, again causing a tide on the far side. No magic needed, no antigravity needed.

From their inception, dark matter and dark energy were created as “place holders” until they could be explained by a grand unified model. … That never happened, instead, scientists idea of a grand unified model started to bend towards the idea that they were correct, and their theory should incorporate a gravity mass that is undetectable, and an energy source that is unexplainable.. I personally, as an armchair physicist, think that this “dark” stuff is dark because we have something wrong. It’s not even there… And never has been. We need another Einstein to jump this gap in our understanding.

It will probably be IE… And I for one welcome our robot overlords if they can solve the riddle!

…here dark dark ….
…. come out come out from ….. hmmm ?

crum. no dark dark … for now ….

The science is settled! Just ask Mr. science Dr. Fauci, but only him because if you ask anybody else you will get a completely different answer. Matter of fact, he himself will give you a different answer every time you ask him about the settled science. Like dark matter, the understanding changes from person to person. I like Wayne’s gravitational solution, demonstrated in his video the best. Solutions based on observation.
Background microwave radiation can be explained and generated by many different natural phenomenon. As for dark matter that does not interact with our universe, except where it wants to, is not a valid explanation. It’s a leap of faith in an unseen invisible world where the dragons, unicorns, fairies and leprechauns live.

Although, there are some unanswered gravity issues that might be the key to solving the dark matter problem… Or just confuse it.
The observation of tides that occur on this planet, particularly during the new moon. With all the gravity sources of the sun, moon and earth in alignment, what causes the bulge rising against gravity on the far side of the planet? Antigravity?
I know the books explains it as “inertia”, which is another way of saying “miracle goes here”.
logic and mathematical expectations would conclude the “combination” of all three gravity sources to cause an “extremely low tide”, with the water level on the sides of the planet at right angles to the gravity source being neutral/sea level. No!
The ocean drops below sea level/low Tide, at right angles to the gravity affect (just as magnetism happens at right angles to the flow of electricity in a wire)
If gravity increases, expressing itself as a lower than neutral water line, it should be able to be measured rising and falling every six hours as the earth rotates. A check of barometric pressure, with no storms, may be sufficient to show the discrepancy with the gravity induced tides.

If the gravity anomaly is applied to the galaxy’s as a whole, it may answer questions… Or not.

The best part is, if anti gravity can occur in nature, humans can find out why and replicate it…

I’m probably being cute but I think it’s hard to prove something exists by it’s absence. Especially when it’s supposed to be “invisible” to start with.

If that is what its going to take to change understanding I expect it will be the 2070’s before dark matter really starts to lose its base of support.

brightdark. Yup.

You have results you can’t explain so you create a fudge to resolve it.