Because you're a biased source.
In contrast, I gave you a more simple, non-mathematical analogy to arrive at the same point. Yet if you can't understand that textual explanation, then there is no chance that you could understand the more complicated math behind it.
And if you do understand that all-text explanation, then the math is unnecessary...which is after all your point, as you want to put up a road block that just gets me to shut up (i.e. your goal).
The simple truth is that you wouldn't know what to do with the math; your hope resides in that I have no response to your demands. Well, your hope is misplaced.
"In contrast, I gave you a more simple, non-mathematical analogy to arrive at the same point. Yet if you can't understand that textual explanation, then there is no chance that you could understand the more complicated math behind it."
Actually, what you gave me was a textual explanation that was incorrect and made assumptions that are incorrect. Based on that, I asked for further information. You seem unwilling to provide it, and that's just fine.
As for what math I can and cannot understand, you have no idea. I do understand that you're conflating the concept of space with the concept of matter. If that extends to the rest of your idea, then you'll be wrong.
There have been several things written in this thread that indicate a lack of understanding of what's being discussed. Your posts are among those.
I'm not sure why you consider me a biased source, but never mind.
Am I the only one who realizes that any math produced will be made up on the spot?