>>11411651Well it pretty much nixes both general relativity and gravitons/quantum field theory as possible theories of gravitation, or it shows that the planetary orbits are not due to a force of gravity. I think the former is a more reasonable place to start. Either way, you should appreciate that theoretical physicists are quite serious when we say that we don't actually understand gravity: it fails everywhere in some way.
There's a plasma physicist named Hannes Alfvén that conjectured: "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems." I think this idea is worth pursuing. Recently it's occurred to me that gravity is essentially unobserved in particle physics experiments. The assumption is that it's simply too weak to detect at those scales, but on the other hand we are fixated on analyzing collisions and not their aftermath. Just some intuition, but maybe it could be formalized somehow.
