> I can't supply what you seek of something within the model that violates the model.
That's not what I asked for. I asked you what you are basing this claim on: "All "orbits" are in reality, spirals. Away, or toward things they're orbiting." Waving your hands and saying "entropy" or "dissolution" or "I don't like the way the models are presented" does not answer that question.
Here's an example of a valid answer to the question, but for a particular case, not for "all" orbits: the "orbit" of the Moon around the Earth is in fact not a closed ellipse but a spiral, slowly spiraling away from Earth. Why? Because the action of the Moon's gravity on the tidal bulge in the Earth caused by the Moon causes the Earth's rate of spin to slowly decrease and the Moon's orbital energy and angular momentum (which determine its perigee and apogee) to slowly increase. But note that in this particular case, the effect has nothing to do with "entropy" or "dissolution", and the model that includes it is commonly presented in textbooks and is not a mystery at all.
Here's another example for a different particular case: the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar. The "orbits" of the two pulsars around each other are not closed ellipses: the pulsars are slowly spiraling towards each other as they emit gravitational waves, which carry away energy and angular momentum. Here, again, the effect has nothing to do with "entropy" or "dissolution", and the model that includes it, while generally only presented to students majoring in physics, is again not a mystery at all.
But these are just two particular cases. A valid answer from you to my question about your claim, which claimed to cover all cases ("all" orbits), would be something along the same lines as above, but citing an effect which is known to be present in all orbits.
That's not what I asked for. I asked you what you are basing this claim on: "All "orbits" are in reality, spirals. Away, or toward things they're orbiting." Waving your hands and saying "entropy" or "dissolution" or "I don't like the way the models are presented" does not answer that question.
Here's an example of a valid answer to the question, but for a particular case, not for "all" orbits: the "orbit" of the Moon around the Earth is in fact not a closed ellipse but a spiral, slowly spiraling away from Earth. Why? Because the action of the Moon's gravity on the tidal bulge in the Earth caused by the Moon causes the Earth's rate of spin to slowly decrease and the Moon's orbital energy and angular momentum (which determine its perigee and apogee) to slowly increase. But note that in this particular case, the effect has nothing to do with "entropy" or "dissolution", and the model that includes it is commonly presented in textbooks and is not a mystery at all.
Here's another example for a different particular case: the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar. The "orbits" of the two pulsars around each other are not closed ellipses: the pulsars are slowly spiraling towards each other as they emit gravitational waves, which carry away energy and angular momentum. Here, again, the effect has nothing to do with "entropy" or "dissolution", and the model that includes it, while generally only presented to students majoring in physics, is again not a mystery at all.
But these are just two particular cases. A valid answer from you to my question about your claim, which claimed to cover all cases ("all" orbits), would be something along the same lines as above, but citing an effect which is known to be present in all orbits.