is In describing the mathematical properties of the universe, one has to pick a principle definition to start with. The conservation of energy seems to be pretty unbreakable, and also the Thermodynamic principle. From the conservation of energy we get that in a gravitational field, we do work to change an objects height position. The work done is the change in height position (in relation to direction of gravitional "force"). If the object is dropped, the constant acceleration adds kinetic energy, according to the distance travelled. Kinetic energy gained is potential energy lost on principle of conservation of energy. Since the energy potential is defined in terms of height, and acceleration is a gravitional constant, energy equivalence insists that the 1/2 value must appear in the kinetic energy gained with distance fallen. It seems stupid to want to change the definition of the energy potential due to height, and there could be no possibility of new physics in doing so, although it is interesting to revisit where we get our physics and energy maths from.