Darla' had this to say:

And I wonder as to the intelligence of anyone who still considers that itis
merely "space reacting to mass" that contains the gargantuan explosive
forces of a star.

I wonder too, about their reasoning process. What manner of pressure
*from without* contains a star's radiative pressure into a stable
sphere? Further, there are two 'litmus tests' of any viable theory of
gravitation: 1.)Supernovae/ hypernovae. 2.) Quasars. Well, let's
combine it all into one, and call it the SHQ Test. To wit, what very
real driving force powers the stellar collapse that drives the fusion
cascade ending in Iron, which rebounds as a spectacular super (or
hyper)nova blast? Further, what very real force powers the far more
energetic *and sustained* process of a quasar?

Clearly, it ain't "curvature" of Something-that-is-yet-nothing", "4D
fields", "fictitious force", or "transfer particles" that reach up and
pull stuff down ('gravitons').

..does science call this just-as-gargantuan containment force something
other than "gravitation", now?

Well, mainstream science sure as hell doesn't. But over the years here
in this NG, you've no doubt read of something called the 'supra-cosmic
overpressure' or SCO. It's theorized to be the hyperpressurized state
*of space itself*, analogous to water pressure deep in the ocean.. and
that space itself is a dynamic, highly mobile Fluid, a universe-
filling Plenum (instead of a 'void').

Q-aq pairs head for matter like a horse who knows its on its way "home".
Hold on and enjoy the ride!

Let's take your "Q-aq" term simply as an analogy of the substance of
space itself... with gravitation being exactly what it appears to be
and behaves as: the pressure-driven, accelerating flow into mass with
mass synonymous with flow sink. *Any* mass, ranging from the proton to
the black hole engine of a quasar, is a flow sink to the
hyperpressurized spatial medium. Its pressure-state exceeds the
degenerative pressure of the atomic nucleus. Heresy, anyone? (:

-- The energy produced by q-aq anihilations is quite suited to both move the
"river"...along and into matter to produce gravitation...

Let's rephrase it slightly. "The pressure-state of the SCO is quite
sufficient to accelerate the 'river' along into matter; producing the
effect called gravitation."

The curvature of space-time...occurs naturally as a result of... countless q-aq pairs as they move faster and faster toward a mass.

With your "q-aq" term seen simply as a metaphor of space itself, the
"curvature" is a descriptor of the *acceleration rate* of flowing
space. 'Curvature' is the accelerometer readout.

Without acceleration there is no 'curvature', no gravity, no momentum
imparted to matter embedded in the flow.

Conversely, in the absence of acceleration, an object moving through
space encounters no resistance *irrespective of its velocity*
(Newton's first law). But when you accelerate that object in space,
the resistance you feel (inertia) is literally the resistance *of
space itself* to the acceleration.

This self-same property of space itself, its 'hyperfluidity',
underlies and fixes the laws of inertia and conservation of momentum.
And it explains gravity-acceleration equivalence which Einstein so
eloquently *described* in his famous 'space elevator' scenario.

And as a fortuitous, unsolicited spinoff, the Flowing-Space model
yields unification of gravity and the strong nuclear force, the long-
sought 'wild card' in any UFTOE/GUT.