No Gary, the maths is wrong. The known laws of gravity describe well an apple at rest falling a stationary tree to a stationary ground. There are no physical gravtiational laws that describe a varying-flight apple falling from a moving tree onto a moving ground, the tree and ground governed by different periodicities, themselves “falling” between larger systems of other trees and grounds. There is no way to test the atmosphere in a lab, unless you can also squeeze a giant moon into the testing chamber, and come up with a control moon that is kept constant. It is too simplistic to say mathematically the moon has negligible force because calculations made by man say so. Math is only our feeble attempt to quantify nature. In this pursuit we are usually found wanting, unless you are an apple-harvester.
An example is this poll. At time of this writing, 34% give Phil a correct rating for the weekend. If one only expected 34% success one would not contine long to run a business. Yet Phil does and runs a commendable website. 34% is not held against him. The reason is because such assessment means very little because it is subjective and only exists in the minds of those who gave their opinion. This collated opinion then gets expressed as a percentage and presented as if it is useful.
Same with the gravitational physics we are asked to believe. There is no math system yet devised that describes the moon’s impact on the air, yet some dreamers think they can “prove” that it has none. They would be better employed working out the number of fairies that can dance on the point of a needle.