[N0B0DY]

No problem using various examples, Fredrick. I'm actually looking for different ways to explain different scenarios pictorially, as Einstein did, to facilitate understanding. But they have to first be understood by me for there to be any type of comparisons made. I can get my head around the balloon analogy, which would conform to Kirchoff's Law of what goes in must come out, but you've gone and bursted it with a stick now. Purposely promoting shapes and reality, I understand.

It appears to me from your analogy that dark matter and dark energy exists, but is unobservable. This is not about language problems. We either have to claim it exists or it doesn't, otherwise we are not remaining contextually consistent. To say that the universe, uni versus, is omniverse - all-inclusive - of any and all possible universes, and that is the problem I have with Lloyd, Dave and others who focus on the empirical and theoretical, but stop there. Even string theorists, who are considered a joke to mainstream scientists, posit membranes as universal separators - lacking the gist of what I want to discuss, which is the state of the whole of the whole of all wholes, and then to discuss the "internal" functioning between the whole/hole. That abstract divider between the one that is never reached and the none that is never reached, primarily because absolutes don't and can't exist.

Therefore, because there are no such things as spaces in between anything if we are to consistently proclaim that "everything" is absolutely connected, all relative functioning must be abstract to prevent ourselves from making contradictory statements.