Painius wrote,

I still say...... that the weak force is
connected with large-scale gravity (the
weaker of the two large-scale forces),

What about when gravity crunches a massive star down to a BH? Did the
weak force do that? Or was it done by the 'curvature' of the "Something
that is yet nothing"?

Let me ask you something... Why do you think the VSP is so damn deeply
imbedded in science today? I know the
story of the historic religious origins, but
that can't be the *whole* story. There
must be more to account for the rigorous way the VSP continues to be
defended
by science! Why do you think that is?

Well, in chain of causation, there were the concerted religious edicts
in Europe to eradicate all traces of 'aether' theories, which set the
stage for the 'no medium' doctrine. Then there was the M-M null result,
which was interpreted to confirm the no-medium premise. Finally, it was
Uncle Albert's final abandonment of the Lorentz ether after 1920, and
the establishment's near-deification of him that set in stone the
no-medium doctrine. And there seems to be an institutional phobia, a
virtual paranoia, against anything remotely smacking of an 'aether'.
And since there is 'no medium', there can be no density gradients
affecting deep-past redshift readings. And there can be no understanding
of the mechanism of gravity, nor unification of gravity in the UFT.

Admittedly, I have a hard time emulating Wolter's total charity for the
Void-Spacers and their paradigm, and his pacifist admonition to "always
respect the other fellow's referance frame". W. and Gandhi woulda made
a great pair. oc