"Historically we have thought of Space-Time as a void (nothing) within which the stars exist and which we live our lives." No exactly. In relational theories there is not such void.
"This changed about 100 years ago when Einstein argued successfully that Space-Time had the property of being curved. All of a sudden
Space-Time became a thing that had properties." It is possible to formulate gravity without spacetime curvature, which implies spacetime doesn't really has such properties.
"The key postulate is that mass curves space-time". That is not a postulate of GR. Curvature is generated by Tab, not by m alone.
The same argument that shows that photons are massless also shows that gravitons are massless. Equations proposed in this essay "for the mass of a single graviton" are incorrect.
There is no reason to assume that all photons have the same energy.
"We now have the total gravitational quantum energy connecting two objects as E = Nhc/d". Gravitational energy is negative, so this expression is invalid.
The energy of a system of rotating masses is not obtained by dividing by 2pi the energy of non-rotating systems. For moving masses the interaction energy also depends on the velocities, not only on positions.
Dark matter and dark energy couldn't be more different. The first is a fictitious distribution of mass introduced in equations that are lacking a proper treatment of inertia. The other is a correction term that accounts for a mass-graviton interaction term is missing in the right hand side of the metric equations.
Vulcan was introduced to account for dynamical terms missing in Newtonian gravity. Vulcan is no more needed. Of course it doesn't exist.
Table in page 5 doesn't show that the GR prediction deviates from the observed value by 0.1%.
"By increasing the density of gravitons we can create a black hole". No really, the graviton field generates a pressure that prohibits a collapse a la GR. No singularity is formed; so no horizon is formed.