Interesting Pete, I personally do not use personal logic, ...

There's no such thing as "personal logic." I'm referring to a formal subfield of philosophy called "Logic." See

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-classical/I use objective logic, ..

Again, there's no such thing. You need to look up the terms you use like this before engaging in an argument where your reasoning is based on it as it is here.

when considering space, that is empty space, I consider no logic is needed to conclude that empty can not change or twist or curve etc.

And that's why you're wrong. I assume that you're familiar with geometry, right? Contrary to popular belief, geometry is not a branch of mathematics but a branch of physics. Using geometry one can arrive at various conclusions based on certain axioms. One axiom is the parallel axiom which states that no two straight lines (i.e. geodesics in space) which start out parallel will ever cross or diverge. In some cases that's true and in other cases that's false. It depends on the geometry of the space in which the lines are in. That geometry is determined by matter. This is the conclusion reached by Einstein when he invented general relativity and which is born out by experiment.

I consider that an axiom unless anyone here can tell me what of empty space can alter?

I can't count the times that I've explained how this has been your problem all along. You keep insisting on using intuition which your mind evolved with and which you grew up experiencing. You'll never understand nature until you can open up your mind and right not its very closed. You have it if there's nothing in space then there's nothing that can be altered. I.e. your mind is stuck saying "How can you alter nothing?" and thus you can't get out of that mode.

Here's how physicists like Einstein etc. understand this; Think of space as it would be described by a Cartesian coordinate system. The problem that idea is that it relies on drawing parallel lines and there's no reason to assume that it can be done. In fact around a black hole it

*can't* be done in anything other than a small finite region of space. But let's say that space is empty and devoid of matter. At least for several tens of light years in any direction. Then within a billion miles or so it can be done very precisely. We can even imagine it as spanning the entire universe in all directions. Under certain circumstances that too can be done. However in either a spatially closed or spatially open universe it can't be done. In a closed universe, caused by too much matter, the geometry is analogous to a spherical surface. Suppose we take a look into the universe of two dimensional beings (like ants moving on a flat table). We could imagine them existing in an infinite flat plane, moving around back and forth carrying on with their daily lives. Other than these beings there is no matter. However we can also imagine that their two dimensional universe is the surface of a balloon. Still there is no matter in this universe and the 2D beings can move around on this surface. However if two of them start off walking side by side in one direction, each moving parallel to each other, then even though they're moving on "straight lines" (i.e. spatial geodesics in a curved space) their paths will cross. This is the same thing that would happen it two people are on the equator walking initially parallel to each other will end up at the exact same point, i.e. the North Pole. This space is still two dimensional but this space is curved.

We can also start with a flat space and move matter into the region and measure the physical properties of the space and we'll see that spatial relations have changed. And that's the thing that's changed, i.e. distances between points.

Do you understand this now? If not then there's no hope that you ever will and I won't make another attempt ever again.