Please try considering this Bruce:

Am I correct that when you swing a ball (tied to a string) in a circle about your head, you have to exert a force towards you along the string?

So a force to the center?

And is it not so, that if you freeze-frame this for a moment, then look at a frame a quarter revolution later; that the OLD force to the center from that quarter-turn ago, is now manifest in the tendency of the ball to want to continue in that OLD direction (which being a quarter turn later, appears as a tangent to the circle, a tendency of the ball to fly away?

Is this correct? Is that why they call centrifugal force a "pseudo-force"?

It is known from quantum electrodynamics that light takes the path of "least time".

Is it not reasonable to suppose a kind of "pull towards the present", towards NOW?

So continuing this idea: what would correspond to "a quarter turn" later?

Well; is not a "definition" of something, an "interaction"? A "now"?

Two categories meet; they intersect: this interaction gives an overlap; the overlapping region is the new "definition" (eg. the words/categories "communication" and "telephone" overlap.

Why should not this idea not fit the "coupling" of electron and photon?

If you regard the new definition as category C; as the comparison of patterns A and B; then this can then meet a fresh category D.

Now you have 4 steps. With words, we have what looks like gravity?

If the new D category was "loudspeaker"; has not the intersection of this category with the intersection of "communication" and "telephone" further narrowed the definition of telephone?

And in the context of the "loudspeaker" category; have not the "telephone" and "communication" categories been brought closer together than when they only overlapped each other alone?

So I put it to you: gravity may be like centifugal force; it may be the force of "old time". It may be the falling together of generalisations as new interaction with new generalisation reduces the "distance" apart of the old generalisations according to their meaning (mass) and distance.

When you look at the techniques of "adding arrows" in quantum electrodynamics: why not "add reference frames" to? To get a final reference frame that has the least complexity? So is always a "NOW", an "interaction". If there is no interaction, how now?

So by doing quantum mechanical "adding / multiplying complex numbers", with not electrons and photons, but with reference frames and comparisons; to use some flash language, we have gravity from quantum relativity?

?????????????????????????

-dolphin