Bill S. More reply to your long gravity post.

Originally Posted By: Bill S.
The easiest way to think about this is to return to the two-dimensional sheet. If we take the rubber sheet into space and place a massive object on it, it will not depress the sheet. In fact it will work only if the whole experiment is conducted is conducted in a gravitational field. Obviously some force is required in order, not only to distort the sheet, but also to maintain it in its distorted shape. If, having distorted the sheet, we took the whole setup out of the gravitational field the elasticity of the sheet would “lift” even the most massive object so that the sheet could return to its non-distorted shape; and just to prove that there was a transfer of energy involved, the massive object would continue moving in a straight line until acted upon by some other force. Similarly, spacetime that has been distorted by the presence of a massive object will not maintain that distortion if the massive object moves away. It seems that an energy exchange is needed, even in the gravitational model of GR.

It seems to me that you are getting carried away with the analogy. Remember that the sheet with a weight on it is indeed just an analogy to give us a way to visualize something that we just cannot visualize. Then you try to extend the analogy by assuming the sheet in a no gravity situation. Well, that just doesn't work. No analogy can be extended too far and your idea certainly does that. In fact the energy required to warp spacetime is just the energy encapsulated in the mass that sits at the center of the warp. There is no other energy required to do the warp.

Bill Gill

C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.