We assume gravity to be a property of mass, but what if that is backwards?

The most significant features of the universe are galaxies, in which light radiates out, as mass collapses in. What if we simply assume some cosmic convection cycle, where expansion and collapse are opposite sides of the dynamic?

Then this collapse would extend all the way out the spectrum, even to the point where light radiation first becomes defined as photons?

This assuming a more analog idea of light, where the photons are the smallest measurable “crests” of an underlaying wave. Which is an idea various old electrical engineer types suggest.

(http://worrydream.com/refs/Mead%20-%20American%20Spectator%20Interview.html)

Then that “missing mass” would actually be contraction further out the radiological spectrum, rather than at the heavier end, associated with mass.

So it is our physical bias toward mass as something fundamental and toward which other objects fall, which causes us to see gravity as a property, rather than a cause of mass.