> The problem with that is then you need a mechanism that creates non-uniformly distributed mass. you need no such thing. thats like saying "i refuse to ackno

> The problem with that is then you need a mechanism that creates non-uniformly distributed mass. you need no such thing. thats like saying "i refuse to acknowledge the pacific ocean to be so damn large without a mechanism". you dont need that. it just is. this doesnt preclude the existence of such a mechanism. but for any (legit) science, mechanistic consideration should be strictly downstream of observation.