I think you may be on the right track, but you are giving properties to gravity that are based on a flawed undersanding of what gravity is.

When gravity is properly defined all the elemental forces become a natural property of gravity, or perhaps a better way to describe it would be that the fundamental forces are all aspects of the same property. This is the "Unified Field Theory" that you seek. A way to the answer is by defining the question.

Gravity is not an attractive force. It is an expansive motion. It could be viewed as collapsing also, but this aspect is confusing until the basics of gravity are understood in the manner which they relate to our observable universe.

Beware the use of magic numbers in your quest. The gravitational constant and the permitivity of free space are ways of saying "Miracle happens here" and are useful for quantifying the mystery but not much good at answering fundamental questions. The units of these magic numbers is of some interest, but the units of the fundamental forces are the most interesting.

In SI units:
Gravity is proportional to kg^2/m^2
Energy is proportional to kg*(m/s)^2

If I use the formula for acceleration due to gravity I find that mass * acceleration is proportional to(`) kg*m/s^2`kg^2/m^2. If I solve this equation I find kg`m^3/s^2. Mass (gravitational)is proportionate to the acceleration of volume.

• I cannot follow your physics - yaniru - January 20, 2003 - 16:23 UTC
  • Physics: Reply - m3pers2 - January 21, 2003 - 01:54 UTC
    • What is the acceleration of gravity ? - yaniru - January 21, 2003 - 04:07 UTC
      • Acceleration of Gravity - m3pers2 - January 21, 2003 - 04:52 UTC
        • Two different distances and masses - yaniru - January 21, 2003 - 12:26 UTC
          • One Distance Cubed - m3pers2 - January 25, 2003 - 17:32 UTC
            • Of course the distance that is changing is the distance between - yaniru - January 25, 2003 - 19:21 UTC
              • I expect an apology - m3pers2 - January 25, 2003 - 22:03 UTC
                • You contradicted your self - yaniru - January 26, 2003 - 04:27 UTC
                  • Yanniru should apologize - quiet - January 28, 2003 - 16:56 UTC
                  • It does stand up. - m3pers2 - February 1, 2003 - 05:35 UTC
                    • Greater detail - yaniru - February 2, 2003 - 00:23 UTC
                      • Details - m3pers2 - February 11, 2003 - 05:54 UTC
                        • That volume is not the volume of mass a or b. - yaniru - February 11, 2003 - 13:26 UTC