How PEI Gravity Differs
A clarification of perspective, not a critique of existing theories
Paudelian Economics Institute (PEI) approaches gravity from a foundational perspective that is intentionally distinct from prevailing frameworks. This page is not meant to challenge, refute, or compete with existing gravitational theories. Instead, it explains how PEI’s gravity framework differs in its starting assumptions, explanatory focus, and conceptual structure.
1. Difference in starting point: source vs emergence
Most established theories of gravity begin by asking how gravity emerges from known quantities—such as mass distribution, energy, or spacetime geometry. PEI begins from a different question:
What if gravity is generated by a specific internal structure rather than emerging automatically from accumulated mass?
In the PEI framework, gravity is source-based. It originates from an internal generative core associated with an astronomical body. Mass accumulation is treated as a secondary, responsive process rather than the primary cause of gravity.
This difference is not about correctness versus incorrectness; it is about where explanation begins.
2. Core–shell distinction vs homogeneous mass
Conventional treatments of gravity typically model astronomical bodies as:
point masses,
continuous mass distributions, or
stress–energy fields without functional separation.
PEI introduces a functional distinction:
Core: the sole generator of gravitational influence
Shell: accreted dust and debris that responds to gravity but does not generate it
This distinction allows PEI to describe growth, stability, and gravitational evolution without assuming that added mass necessarily strengthens gravity.
3. Fixed generative capacity vs mass-amplified gravity
In many gravitational models, adding mass increases gravitational influence.
In contrast, PEI assumes:
The generative capacity of the core is finite and fixed
Accretion does not amplify gravitational strength
Growth increases radius, which geometrically attenuates surface gravity
As a result, PEI gravity evolves primarily through geometric dilution, not mass amplification. This leads to natural stabilization rather than runaway growth.
4. Growth as a self-limiting process
In standard cosmological narratives, large-scale structure formation is often treated as an early-universe process that largely concluded long ago. PEI adopts a different emphasis:
Mass accumulation is ongoing
Growth slows naturally as surface gravity weakens
Final size emerges from internal core strength, geometry, and environmental availability—not from unlimited attraction
This makes PEI gravity particularly suited to describing long-term evolutionary behavior, rather than static end states.
5. Analogy as a heuristic, not a mechanism
PEI frequently uses the analogy of a clay sphere containing an invisible magnet. This analogy is not intended to suggest that gravity is electromagnetic in nature, nor that a literal magnet exists inside planets or stars. Its purpose is conceptual:
The visible exterior does not reveal the source of force
Accumulation on the surface does not strengthen the source
Distance from the source matters more than surface appearance
The analogy is a thinking tool, not a physical claim.
6. Relationship to existing theories
PEI gravity does not seek to replace or invalidate established theories such as Newtonian gravity or general relativity. Those frameworks are extraordinarily successful within their intended domains. PEI’s work operates in a different mode:
theory-first rather than confirmation-first,
foundational rather than incremental,
exploratory rather than reconciliatory.
In this sense, PEI gravity should be read as parallel conceptual research, not as opposition.
7. What PEI gravity is—and is not
PEI gravity is:
core-sourced rather than mass-emergent
non-amplifying under accretion
self-limiting through geometric attenuation
designed for conceptual clarity and originality
PEI gravity is not:
a critique of existing gravitational success
a claim of experimental refutation
a reinterpretation of electromagnetism
an assertion of immediate correctness
8. Why PEI explores this path
Scientific progress has often involved stepping outside accepted explanatory frames to explore alternative foundations. PEI’s objective is to ask whether gravity can be coherently understood through a different set of primitives—one in which generation, growth, and geometry are cleanly separated.
Acceptance is not the immediate goal.
Clarity, internal consistency, and originality are.
By articulating how PEI gravity differs—without dismissing what already works—this page aims to make that exploratory intent transparent.