Lenka,
What if gravity isn't a property of mass, but mass is an effect of gravity?
Look at galaxies; The energy radiates out, while mass falls in. According to both theory and observation, overall space is flat, as the outward expansion, measured in the redshift of the radiation, is balanced by the inward curvature of space. This is explained in current cosmology by Inflation, expanding the universe so far and fast it only appears flat, like the surface of our planet appears flat from our point of view.
Yet what would it mean, if it really is flat? That the expansion of the light is in inverse propertion to the contraction of the gravity. Effectively that with cosmic redshift, Hubble had discovered Einstein's Cosmological Constant. The balance required to sustain stable, flat space.
Consider Big Bang theory; For one thing, it can't be falsified, as whenever there is a gap between prediction and observation, some enormous force of nature is simply assumed, to fill the gap.
Most notably with Inflation and Dark Energy, but actually the very first patch was when they realized that as redshift increases proportional to distance in all directions, it makes us appear to be at the center of this expanding universe. So it was changed from an expansion in space, to an expansion of space, because spacetime!
Which completely ignores the central premise of Relativity, that the speed of light is always measured as a constant. If intergalactic light is being redshifted, obviously it is not constant to intergalactic space.
The doppler redshift means the light remains a stable metric, relative to which the distance increases.
The popular analogy is of an inchworm crawling on an expanding balloon, yet these are both metrics drawn from the same light, crossing the same space.
Even in this theory, the speed is still being treated as the denominator. Which makes the expansion the numerator.
Suffice to say, I've been banned and insulted for making this point, though occasionally some grudging acknowledgement, but never refuted, because it is simple and obvious. All the complex math and precise observations have overlooked a basic fallacy.
Yet we are at the center of our point of view and so a logical conclusion would be that redshift is an optical effect. It has been noted that multispectrum light "packets" do redshift over distance, as the higher frequencies dissipate faster, yet that would mean we are sampling a wave front, not observing individual photons that have traveled billions of lightyears and that raises troublesome questions as to the irreducibility of the photon.
What if the photon is not a point particle of light, but the quantity of energy our material receptors can absorb and thus detect? It would mean there is some process of collapse, where the waves of light essentially condense, like water vapor into a raindrop.
Then consider if this is the initial turning point, where the light radiating out starts to become the mass falling in?
All that excess gravity would not be due to some missing mass, but all the "condensation" further out the spectrum.
In which case, we not only sense it, we are it. We have the digestive, respiratory and circulatory systems processing the energy driving us on, while the central nervous system sorts through the forms precipitating out.
Then that we evolved as groups in this thermodynamic environment, with social energies radiating out, as civil and cultural forms coalesce in. Energy and order, desire and judgement, youth and age, liberal and conservative.
Government, as the executive and regulatory function, serving as the central nervous systems of societies, while money and banking function as the blood and circulation systems.
Yet we remain these little mobile organisms, seeking the pot of gold at the end of the narrative arc, as reality remains cyclical. Pushing toward the extremes and ignoring the reaction and feedback.
