You can always make local arguments that, say, some g can be substituted with some c. The issue is broader than that. It concerns the premises of vast areas of

You can always make local arguments that, say, some g can be substituted with some c. The issue is broader than that. It concerns the premises of vast areas of physics -- you have to show they are more likely false than true. This isnt an argument saying no c can be found for any given g, it's saying, "g-c gaps have empirical consequences we havent observed" and if we did, physics would be foundationally wrong