<i>Also, the science communication bit is a red herring</i><p>What?  It&#x27;s literally <i>the core of the conversation</i>.<p>Your argument seems to be &quot;it&#x27;s impossible to accurately explain GR to people in a way they&#x27;ll understand, so we shouldn&#x27;t even try, and any attempt to use analogies that may lead to incorrect intuition should be abandoned&quot;.<p>I fundamentally disagree with that premise.  It&#x27;s the height of academic elitism, and presumes that perfect fidelity that few understand is more important than imperfect analogy that might allow laymen to gain some minimal insight.