> http://edition.cnn.com/fyi/backgrounders/relativity.math/index.html > > Stephen Hawking: "In that 1905 paper, Einstein pointed out that because you could not detect whether or not you were moving through the ether, the whole notion of an ether was redundant. Instead, Einstein started from the postulate that the laws of science should appear the same to all freely moving observers. In particular, observers should all measure the same speed for light, no matter how they were moving."
Hawking wrote a similar notion in Brief History Of Time, that it may be the make up of the universe that prevents full knowledge of a Unified Theory being possible.
Uncertainty is at the heart of scientific method. The speed of light is so absurdly fast we really only measure the effects, and must exercise lateral thinking to fit the often counter-intuitive observations.
If gravity is explained as a macro-centrifugal force, like a spinning wheel Universe then it would always be in the same direction at any solar system scale. Hence the Universe itself must be 'moving' and instead of the force of gravity being away from the center of the wheel it is towards the average nearest central mass. In our real world, only a sponge like material has this property of summative non-local influence on the curvature of the fabric at a distance.
However at the more concrete levels of the universe in 'Quantum Foam' non-local pairing of particles occurs all the time. So an algorithmic method of gravity without a 'physical' ether is apparent. In fact to compute the gravity of n particles in a system is a O(n^2) problem, and the probability of 2 particles selected at random having entanglement is O(n^1/2), see Birthday Attack. Therefore as the number of particles increases, the gravity calculation remains at O(n) ensuring a scalable function.