Thanks again for you replies.

Regarding your last paragraph, I like classical mechanics and your gravity-only theory because it makes sense and gives a uniform explaination of all phenomena without exotic interpretations and assumptions. Modern physics of course make great discoveries and is becoming very comprehensive and advanced, but tends to give more and more exotic interpretations and bold statements for phenomena that occur on a very large or a very small scale which their observations and relatively very recent. Also, they are very unwilling to reconsider some of the recent theories and "laws" which are not established very strongly and for a long time. Also, it is too "earth-centric" to have different "laws" and physics for the micro and the macro universe (weak, strong, electromagnetic interactions for smaller levels and gravity for the large ones).

About my previous questions, indeed their scope was rather big for just a simple reply and the second question was not very clear. The question was actually about how smaller particles form a higher level object, for example how atoms form molecules and how molecules form earth. Of course, gravity attracts them around a center of mass. The question was if this is enough or there is some connection between these inside particles like the "chemical bond" we know. There is no need to give another reply now, it is more as a food for thought. I think, that a good explanation of "matter formation from lower levels" would solve some other mysteries we have like these ones:

• planet and star formation (are nebulae and space debris enough?)
• heavy elements abundance (are the rare supernovas enough to fill the entire universe with such elements?)
• water production and earth expansion