Reading now. Will comment as I go along. By and large
liking what I'm reading. although gravity theory is not
my forte by a long shot.
"Along the way; we saw the creation of space give way
to the production of particles, and then to nucleosynthesis,
while the universe was still an energy soup - where
matter and energy are interchangeable and ever interchanging,
because the mean interaction distance is so small."
== Another evident asymmetry in this universe is matter/antimatter.
That is, we seem to live in a matter dominant universe. I address
(solve) this asymmetry in my last paper, but whether or not it
is correct, unless the universe started symmetric, and all the
antimatter got sucked away in tiny interaction asymmetries, if the
universe was born with this asymmetry, then there can't have been
a time when it was all energy. But maybe that doesn't matter
(pun intended).
==It's unclear to me why the Mandelbrot Set should be singled out.
There are infinitely many fractal sets that one can generate by
iterating functions of a complex (or quaternion, or octonion) variable.
Of course, asymmetry is rampant in this field.
"However; exploring the possibility that gravity can be explained as a
consequence of other forces yields insights that may help us figure out
how to craft better unifying theories than we might if that option was
off the table. The relevance of those insights likely reflects the
pervasive presence of asymmetry in the natural world. I think that
our preoccupation with symmetry has blinded some Physics folks to the
value of asymmetry in Physics, and it will take considerable effort
to learn the other side of the story."
== I have been aware for a little while that there are are some who
wonder if gravity needs to fit into the QFT/symmetry set of notions
about how forces/interactions work. Non quantum GR isn't really a
theory of interactions. "Spacetime tells matter how to move; matter
tells spacetime how to curve."* (Wheeler) Matter isn't being pulled,
or pushed, until it encounters an obstruction, like our feet on the
ground. Anyway, I always harbor hope that some alternative viewpoint
will turn out to have more Truth than the mainstream's.
*You know, that's a good metaphor for what we're all doing. We all
have an intuition about how things might work - a kind of intellectual
geodesic. It is unwise to stray from your personal geodesic, which
is your personal path of least resistance (right or wrong). Keep
at it; it's worth pursuing. But maybe minimize introducing words like
"likely" into the discussion. I have no idea how you'd quantify the
probability of an unproved idea being valid. :)