Let me get this straight: you start a thread decrying theoretical physics, yet you didn't even realize the one of the foremost current theoretical physicists had written a book on the subject you created a thread about? Next you're gonna say you don't know who Michio Kaku is.....
But to say empty space has more energy than U-238... well, that seems a bit much to me.
You know, this site does have code that allows you to work out proper math function if that is what is holding you back from showing your work. I mean, you've some nerve to call Feynman, Richard Fucking Feynman!, into question without so much as linking to some math proof that you've worked out elsewhere, let alone showing us directly. You've spent this whole thread calling numerous great minds into question and you've not even written up 2+2.
Since you seem to not have understood what I thought to be a fairly simplistic accusation, I'll put it in even simpler terms (I hope): you are attempting to re-write portions of physics and are disagreeing with some of the best and brightest physicists of our time and of time past. You are simply quoting bits and pieces and saying "I don't agree with this" or "this doesn't seem to be correct" and all the while you have yet to actually show your work. The models of cosmology you are dismissing have the maths to back them up and it would seem to me, a layperson to the extreme, that it would be wise of you to do the same in your attempted refutation. Now, don't take this as a hand wave away, because you very well could be on to something, but when proven members such as cavediver, son goku and NoNukes who have already shown their work, disagree with you, I am inclined to err on the side of caution and trust their judgment.
It's a simple request: show your work. This does not mean link to some papers and say that you "haven't had time to digest them", but use the code this site has and show your actual work. Unless, of course, my initial preconceived notion of your being just an IDer trying to bastardize science to garner proof for a designer is true and you've no intent on actually doing the science. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for now, though.