The first 'attractive' force in the universe was that of electromagnetism. No latter, no matter. At what point or stage in the increasing burgeoning bulk of the fledgling Earth could it legitimately be stated that local matter in space, ( be it either dust particles or asteroids), were alternatively drawn to Earth, not by the influence of the electromagnetic force, but by the force of 'gravity' ? When do we begin to describe the former as being the latter. QUOTE]
It is the combined mass of a lump of matter, ( the Earth for example), which determines it's gravitational force. The moon, (1/80th mass in comparison), has approx 1/6th gravitational force. The gravitational pull of an asteroid the size of Wales, less again than that of the moon. An asteroid the size of a mountain, less again; though still measureable nonetheless. ( The latter would still be capable of attracting particles of passing dust on to it's surface). If we take this to it's logical conclusion, could we not assume that a lump of matter the size of a football drifting through space, continues to assert a degree of gravitational force, (however small and perhaps no longer measurable), on it's immediate vicinity? How about a molecule of water? We eventually arrive at a piece of matter where the only 'attractive' force is that of electromagnetism. Given that matter would not exist without the electromagnetic force,('no latter, no matter'), we can see that Newtonian gravity is directly correlated with the electromagnetic force.