I appreciate that you did read and consider what I wrote, and also followed up the links. Also I appreciate that despite some of your personal views, nonetheless you seem to be trying to come to grips with the accepted wisdom.

Just one comment about language: phyics uses terms which have common everyday usage and meaning, but defines them much more exactlly, sometimes with strange sounding results. Space is one example. Our everyday notions of 'utterly empty space' are not the same as in physics - which yes, does conceive of empty space as still possessing some base-level energy.

Also BTW, I did like your understanding about visible stars and the photons which must therefore be travelling through the void between it, and the observer.

Now on the other hand, I did feel this other post of yours went way off the deep end, and concluded that I'd wasted my time. Now I see you are still grappling with the issues, and so would like to give my impressions:

I wonder whether you and SDAI have this in common: tapping into and using a sort of Germanic mythologizing to describe the world. I think this was big in the Romantic era (19th century) but would surely have its roots much further back than that. The mythological themes of Wagner's operas are an example of what I mean. Seems like this is an important part of the German Romantic mentality.

yes that's just a theory, but even so I would then point to the other aspect of the German mind: the exact, strictly scientific but also transcendental genius. 3 examples: Johannes Kepler, Karl Friedrich Gauss, and Georg Riemann, whose geometry is the foundation of Einstein's General Relativity.

I would advise you and SDAI to follow these guys rather than arbitrary mythologies.

The other point is: regarding "following one own's path and bucking the scientific establishment". Those who did that successfully were not arbitrary individualists but people of strong character WHO WERE TOTALLY IMMERSED AND INVOLVED IN THEIR CONTEMPORARY SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, but then struck new and bold paths from that point.

Einstein built on from Riemann, Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism, and Newtonian mechanics.

The same applies to great music (I am a 'germanophile' in this area). Beethoven, the greatest musical revolutionary of all, is completely dependent on those before him: Mozart and Haydn. In fact, the "First Viennese School" MEANS Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven all in one.

Finally, regarding individualism and the egocentric pride of having one's 'own theory of everything'. That's all very well but the greatest example of humility IMO is that of Johann Sebastian Bach, who thought nothing of WALKING several hundred miles in order to hear the playing of another organist in another town.

Note: not to hear his own music, or promote himself in any way, but just to keep up with the latest developments. And he walked hundreds of miles to do it.

In his own lifetime Bach's music was often used as lunchwrapping paper.

I wish you all the best for now ..

Daniel