Relative Motion (A Thought Experiment)

I think this might be one of the current problems with the BB theory. This theory was made with the mindset that space is just that, space. But quantum physics shows us that space is more like a material. So if space itself should expand from nothing, what would that look like? It wouldn't be expanding in our 3 or 4 dimensions only like a literal bomb explosion. It would expand in every dimension at once. Sort of like increasing density rather than volume I guess?More to the point of the OP, I have read that a photon as it travels through space encounters an antiphoton causing an anhialation which then releases another photon, so a light wave would be more like a sound wave in this respect? So could not also the particles that make up the larger particles do the same? Isn't it Zero Point Energy that sustains larger particles?If space is made up of Zero Point Energy from a sea of particles with neither exact position or velocity, then I guess perhaps the lone earth could either be said to be in an exact position in space (though I have no idea what kind of coordinates to use) or have an exact velocity relative to the ZPE particle sea... or do two sets of two relativities equal no position or velocity? Gah...!This IS a mind bending thought.

Ohhh Now I get your question!Why don't the two fall into each other?!? Are the two orbiting each other about their barycenter or is the universe orbiting the two about their barycenter.The only difference between the two orbiting each other and the universe spinning around them is that in the former they stay apart, and in the latter they fall together.So motion MUST be in relation to space itself or else the two WOULD fall into each other.

from: Mach's Principle -- from Eric Weisstein's World of PhysicsSo does this mean that space is a product of the matter that is in it? If Mach's principle is not true, and the lone planet or tidally locked system is the only thing in a universe of the same characteristics of our own, then it seems like this little thought experiment says that space is a 'thing' that motion is relative to.Just thinking out loud, but if massive objects tend to pull space with them (I think we recently put a satellite up to test this) and motion is relative to space, then might it be possible to verify this experimentally? A massive spinning planet or star would spin space a little with it reducing the actual centripetal acceleration from the theoretical by a very slight amount?Maybe I'm just crazy.

I THINK we sent the satellite up to detect space being dragged by the earth's gravitational field as it moves in it's orbit around the sun.What I am saying is that if this satelite does detect this, then a massive spinning planet or star would spin space slightly with it. If space is spinning with the planet and motion is relative to space, then the planet's rotational effects like centripetal acceleration would be slightly less than the theoretical. ...Kinda like those fancy new hubcaps that spin freely around the tires... If motion is not relative to space, then 'space-drag' should not effect these things. right? Maybe I'm completely off. If this could be detected, then this would mean space is an absolute reference frame I think.