Revised Version of Newton's Laws of Motion

Here is Simanek's excellent page on the traditional non-perpetual-motion view, showing how Newtonian physics are not usually violated:
https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/NewtonsThird.htm

He points to the idea that Newton's 2nd law (f = ma) is rarely brought into question even by skeptics. So, you might wonder, how is it wrong in my view?

First I would like to say that I consider my work mostly compatible with Newtonian physics, although not necessarily the views espoused by Simanek.

The problems with f = ma are several:

1. It is possible to make a string taut without much acceleration. This, a type of literal work is being done almost invisibly.

2. Consequently, we might propose a mass-force, because in some cases such as a lateral pulley, the force is directed differently from gravity.

3. I argue that the structural changes happen at the limit in the case of near-mitionlessness, rather than just beyond it. It cannot be Relativized to mean when the rope breaks, or when the rope moves a larger distance. Most of the work is being done without breaking the rope.

4. Now consider the opposite of a photon in the f = ma equation. If photons can exist virtually without mass, then we should also be able to predict force virtually without acceleration. Otherwise photons seem absurd. So, the equation itself is also in support of mass-energy.

See also:

https://www.quora.com/I-have-an-idea-on-how-to-create-a-perpetual-device-What-do-I-do-now/answer/Nathan-Coppedge/comment/23700386