edwardsuk

I thought I posted this as a metaphysical idea, under philosophy not under physics. It is not a theory, it is a hypothesis and it's a simple hypothesis gravity may not be a force of mass, it could be a force due to space, we ignore space because we consider it as nothing, but all I'm attempting to point of is space maybe something. That's as far as I can take it, I have access the New Scientist publication, but I can't post it because of copyright. I would love to give you a theory of everything this evening, but it was never intended to be that.

And gravity is weakest between galaxies that redshift moving away from each other faster, also think about what you said space has no gravity, Ghideon.url

I don't want this idea to become a theory, because if it was a theory I would write a paper and publish it. It is only written to suggest that we currently look at matter to explain all the fundamental forces, and we also look to matter in the hope of finding a fundamental particle which will allow us to explain gravity, all I'm suggesting is it might not be there, it might be space which gravity is derived from. The universe is expanding as it expands there is less matter binding it, but within galaxies, where there is less space they don't expand at the same rate, things stick together. I don't want to go any further with this because it is just an idea, and I don't want to make any attempt to prove it. It's a metaphysical idea for people to ponder and nothing more, please don't think of this as my decisive theory of everything.

No - You misunderstand, it's down to my brief and poor explanation, which is easily misinterpreted; mass causes space to curve, I'm not suggesting that mass does not cause the curvature of space. but this is the effect we see in the orbits of planets following the curvature of space to form their orbit. What science is trying to understand is what is gravity, rather than just understanding the observed effect of gravity, is it due to a particle such as a graviton, and if it is a graviton where would that particle live, I'm suggesting that gravity is not derived from matter, it is derived from space. I think this idea came to mind because of an article in the new scientist, I remember reading it back in October. It was titled Einstein killed the aether. Now the idea is back to save relativity https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24432543-300-einstein-killed-the-aether-now-the-idea-is-back-to-save-relativity/

This has been placed in philosophy, it is a metaphysical idea. Metaphysics is a generic pointer which could assist in the development of new physics and science, I have spent many year studying cosmology from the life cycle of stars, to the evolution of planetary systems. I have a clear conceptual understanding of relativity, time dilation and other matters. This idea may have already been debunked, but it is in my opinion it is important to publish it because it might develop a new line of thinking. The idea is simple and I hope I can explain it clearly in the next few paragraphs. Gravity is the enigma, which could be considered the final puzzle of modern physics, not to say that this would be the end, but maybe the start of the next generation of physics, but until gravity can be integrated in the quantum realm, it seems we can't develop a theory of everything. We currently turn to mass and dark matter to explain the gravitational effect in the universe, my thought was very simple mass may not have anything to do with it, it might be purely down to space, space is responsible for the gravitational effect rather than matter. We might need to stop looking at matter as the source of gravity and turn out attention to space instead. The universe is expanding at ever accelerating rates as space expands there is less matter to bind it, it could very well be the lack of space where matter resides where gravity is greatest. That's it! it is only a passing thought, but I feel that there may be some merit in the idea.