[Physics] Empty (?) space

[Thomas Goodey]

On 25 Jan 2017 at 12:00, physics-request at tuks.nl wrote:

> I agree with Nainan, "Action at a distance through empty
> space is not acceptable".

Why not, if that is what is actually seen? Which it is. 
What do you mean by "not acceptable"? It's not for you to 
accept or not accept, what Nature provides!

By "empty space" here, I presume you mean, space not 
containing any tangible bodies of the usual type such as 
lumps of metal, wood, or anything consisting of baryonic 
matter.

To massage your feelings by inventing some non-baryonic 
"thing" in that empty space, so as to be able not to call 
it "empty", would be only pushing words around.

Thomas Goodey

************************************
What do you do when your dream dies?
Dreams die in every life. But not Pham's 
dream. He had pursued it across five hundred 
light years and three thousand years of 
objective time. It was a dream of a single 
Humankind, where justice would not be 
occasional flickering light, but a steady glow 
across all of Human Space. He dreamed of 
a civilization where continents never 
burned, and where minor kings didn't give 
children away as hostages.

............Vernor Vinge, 'A Deepness in the Sky'