I have had some issues with the concept of gravity being based upon an overwhelming amount of mass reaching a threshold that grants an object the capability of attracting other objects or influencing their orbital plane. The concept failed one day when I was thinking about something else completely and had a flash of insight; Saturn. My brain wispered the word in the back of my mind and I suddenly realized a fundamental flaw in the structure of our assumptions. Saturn is namely made of helium and hyrdrogen with some methane and amonia components mixed in. If we had a large enough body of water and put Saturn in it the damn thing would float. This is not density by any serious means so something else is at play here. Saturn has the third largest gravity well in the solar system, yet has no real density. Saturn does however have the third largest magnetosphere in the solar system. I know, logic solved gravity, but the facts were just sitting there in the wrong order, waiting to be put together. But apparently my brain wasn't just satisfied with this and decided to figure out a potential working model of the link between magnetism and gravity effects. I theorize that as more and more electron orbits are filled the displacement eventually reaches beyond the physical close bonds of the object's normal fields the attraction expands as well. Perhaps an exponential build up expresses outwards as in the old theory describes. However this explains why black holes have an insanely high gravity well compared to the amount of material that is left over. Think about this critically in that in all super novae phenomena there is an ejection of mass and energy. Afterwords the core remnants become 'critical' in some way and implode. I'm no cosmologist and won't even pretend to understand beyond what is just absolutely minimal but there are some major holes in these assumptions that should be addressed. Why does this imensely strong field of gravity suddenly come about from even less material that was once exerting a lesser influence. I don't believe the bullshit about an object 'bending' space time from gravity fields, but I can see electromagnetic fields doing so. The Zeeman effect can bend light and is observed in sunspots that are especially active, the likely explanation of 'gravitic lensing'. And also the apparent effect of inescapable attraction is misconstrued as a bend because pretty much anything entering the field becomes attracted by the overwhelming displacement; gravity and black holes explained to a degree, voila!
Of course this could be completely wrong but I think some of it is on the right track and some has already been proven to a degree, though I am waiting for the math theorists to catch up. This is an origional work and I am utilizing the blockchain as a means of establishing first public publishing of these concepts as they are structured.
