Note three paragraphs were added the next day at the end of text, which suggest a speculative QMU explanation for "dark energy" as well as gravity.
... I doubt I will get any argument in regards to the observation that light is bent around a gravitational mass. ... This means that the trajectory path of photons can be altered by this hypothetical repelling force. ...
I agree light bends in gravity gradients and "no gradient" gravity does not exist in either theory. As the gradient falls off as the inverse cube, not the square, It would seem possible with two different mass stars A & B to have light pass a path by each where either their gravity (at closest approach points) were the same or their gradients were the same and learn which produces identical bending. I don't know whether "equal gradients" or equal "gravity strength" produces "equal bending." Someone well versed in general relativity should be able to answer. I bet the bending is equal when the gradient, not the strength, of A & B are equal.
I mention this only to admit that gravity by QMU shadow gravity must pass a more severe test than just the demonstration of bending of light, but that is all I will discuss now. I don't however, need to admit that
directly can "path of photons can be altered by this hypothetical repelling force." {BTW it is not a force. Its imbalance causes a force, we call gravity.} In fact I can't admit that. In last post (on why stars have sharp images) I claim there is zero cross section for the interaction between QMUs and photons.
This however, does not preclude an
indirect interaction in which space and QMUs interact to produce the "warped space" gravity, in complete agreement with general relativity's warped space view of gravity. Recall:
... {QMUs} exist in large numbers isotropically distributed thru out all space because each tiny volume of space is like a radioactive atom and spews them out at a "fixed" rate in random directions. (Very much like a kilo of Cobalt 60 spews out gamma rays in random directions at a "fixed" rate. – The major difference is that the gamma rays carry energy away from the kilo so it is decreasing in mass with time. The postulated particles don’t carry away any energy so the tiny elements of space are not decreasing in mass with time.) Possibly the tiny elements of space always radiate two of postulated particles in opposite directions, each with one quantum of momentum, so momentum is conserved but “pair-wise random" in direction of + & - travel. ...
If that is true, then there clearly is at least the “creation interaction” between space and QMUs. Likewise, as most of physics is “time reversible” there probably is the “annihilation interaction” between a zero total momentum pair of QMUs and space. And some quantum mechanical “tolerance” too on that interaction as momentum and space (location) do have the uncertainty product limit on their mutual precision.
Perhaps in the star’s QMU shadow there is less of this inverse reaction (or some other not yet postulated* interaction between QMUs and space) as the QMU flux is less there and that has a “warping effect” on space, making it in some sense a more dense optical medium. (Light does bend towards the optically denser region of transparent mediums.) Idea here is space’s “intrinsic optical density” (if there were no QMUs) is reduced by the QMU/space interaction to a value which probably explains why light speed C has the value it does. So, in the shadow region that reduction is less and the optical density is therefore greater. The closer you come to the star, the greater the optical density of space becomes, so of course light bends towards the star when passing by it.
------------
*Following Ockham’s advice, I won’t postulate more until forced to. Thus far I have postulated QMUs exist, travel at speed of light, have extremely small cross section for interaction with mass, but when they do inter act they give 100% of what they are (one pure quantized unit of momentum with no energy or mass) to the matter they inter act with. And that every element of space spews them out at a statically fixed rate pair-wise traveling in opposite directions. I.e. a balance has now been achieved between their production and destruction rates so the strength of gravity in the current era is essentially constant but see last three paragraphs below for more on how it may have varied a long time ago.
Perhaps very early in the universe's history during the "inflation period" the space density of QMU was very high (all of the elements of space producing QMUs were in very small volume); this mechanistically explaining the explosive inflation assuming their interaction with space itself is like a pressure in space. Then, at or near the end of the inflation, the space density of QMUs had fallen in the rapidly growing larger universe, but the total number of QMUs still steadily increasing linearly with time until matter began to form as the universe cooled.
When the first stars were forming, the universe was much smaller than now and matter had just recently starting to destroy QMUs. I.e. the "pre-matter" linear rate of increase in total QMU population started to slow down (less than linear increase) as matter increasingly destroyed them. But when first stars existed, the total number of QMUs was still increasing and thus may not have been as great as it is now, (production rate still greater than destruction rate in part because with matter more concentrated in stars, each QMU lived longer before it found some matter to die in.); however, the QMU space density probably was greater due to the much smaller universe. Clearly the strength of gravity in this theory depends only upon the local density of QMUs but that depends upon how many QMUs exist vs. the volume of the universe. - I.e. the first stars experienced stronger gravity than stars now do, so stars are separating at a faster rate now, as is observed.
The above two paragraphs are pure speculation hinting that dark energy might have a QMU density explanation. I.e. gravity probably is not a constant and the observations which suggest the existence of "dark energy" when applied to this theory suggest it was stronger in the past. I.e. QMUs per unit of universe was greater when early stars were forming.