I think it is entertaining to watch DA and dehammer exchange ideas.
I tried DA's Google "gravity has gravity" and I saw a lot of comments on gravity. None of the titles on the first pages used the words "gravity has gravity" so I only opened a few and found nothing of help. From my own part I can see why the idea would be confusing. It is like saying that the gravity related to an object generates gravity of its own which is to me like saying gravity is "creating" a separate gravitational force. If this was true why would not this new gravitational force also create an additional gravity and so on and so on?
Mass can be said to have a potential of energy. But we know of no Mass in this System that is at rest so we note by the movement of the known Mass energy is also involved. People are still trying to measure the strength of gravity and from what little I read they are not doing it as if there were layers of gravity that were also producing more gravity.
I have never learned how E=Mc^2 is supposed to relate to the existence or non-existence of gravity. I thought it was a measure of the energy we can expect to get from a given amount of Mass. To say that energy has gravity is a little missleading to me because the photon is just about pure energy and appears to have no gravitational field of its own. An electric current is energy and has a magnetic field around a conductor but we do not call it a gravitational field.
While admitting my lack of backround here I do not think it is accurate to say that Mass and energy are interchangable. Some other thing must be added to convert one to the other, like the way we convert water and ice. It would follow from my viewpoint that energy has not been shown to have gravity. What "gravity has gravity" means is beyound me, and I admit it.
jjw
