I do not doubt mathematics or your ability to use it accurately. You do an excellent job with the numbers. I wish that the written language was as precise and without ambiguity as the mathematical formulas are.

As I understand English language: If I “acquire” money, I will be richer than I was before acquiring it, but if I “have” money, then I may or may not be rich. If mass moves, it “has” energy, if it “accelerates” then it “acquires” kinetic energy. Am I missing something here.
Hmmm…Time does come into the equation, if I only acquire little bit of money over a long period of time it will take a very long time for me to become very rich.

Confusion again: You say: “The acceleration has nothing to do with the kinetic energy”
Then you say: “velocity = acceleration x time.” Is velocity not associated with the quantity of kinetic energy?

You say that: “As for your idea of a “force field”, there is no such thing.”
I can understand that a moving hammer can force a nail into wood, and that is true as long as there is a large enough “field“ around the head of the nail to give room for the hammer movement. Question; is it not a “force” that moves the hammer in the first place?

I agree that; the acceleration of a falling object is different on a different celestial body, and I agree that the massive object will have greater force that the light object when they hit the ground. And I agree that they will hit the ground at the same time if dropped from the same height, provided that there is no resistance from the atmosphere. The question still is: If there is no “field” then what causes the acceleration?

You said: “Energy, matter, space and time. That’s all you need, no spooky forces or magic energy reservoirs, or Jeddi force fields.”
Was it Hans Solo that said something to that effect in Star Wars?
I agree that space, mass and energy is all we need, but I would add “in this life”;-) I omit time, because time is included in the energy part. As in: E=mc^2

You said: “And one more thing, there is no such thing as a “field”.
I do not agree, because I do not understand how a “mathematical concept” alone could cause the acceleration of mass.

You said: “The field does not “give” energy to objects moving through it, or it would eventually have to run out of energy, right?”
I’m not quite sure about that, earlier we touched on the subject of potential and kinetic energy exchange. If; as you said previously, there is a balance of kinetic and potential (for) energy in the universe, then when the kinetic increases the potential must decrease to keep everything in balance, but at some point the kinetic energy could decrease and the potential would increase. That implies a sinusoidal oscillation. Perhaps the whole universe is just an oscillation of energy states.