This is gonna take some explaining, and full disclosure: I'm still undergrad, so please, forgive my ignorance here. Though please also hear me out: magnetism, like gravity, falls off with distance, yeah? But we have fairly solid evidence that even at extreme distances, gravity's influence remains felt what with our still having a Pluto, for instance.
Now, the "Reissner-Nordstrom" solution to Einstein's gravitational field equations (which describes the gravitational field in the exterior of a spherical body with non-zero net electric charge) demonstrated that the path followed by particles in the gravitational field of a spherically symmetric body depends on whether or not the body carries a charge, indicating both exert force on one another when such a charge is present (read: electromagnetic fields produce gravitational fields, in contrast to the Schwartzchild Solution).
Okay, great... so what?
Recently, my studies have dragged me over and through excitons. "Interesting, but personally irrelevant, I'd thought, and promptly filed away the datum and forgot about it. Then, today, I ran into this paper out of MIT. And something sparked.
In it, they describe how they can induce magnetism with an intense photon barrage within excitons. Again: so what? Admittedly, it takes some oomph to create excitons, and we're not talking about a terribly useful characteristic, in terms of the scale at which humans operate, although when hit HARD enough, excitons can remain open or dressed for... well, forever, if I recall correctly.
Unbidden, the thought came... "hmm. what is spherical, has energy (literally) to burn, and flings photons all over the place?
Stars do that.
And we've known for some time stars have crazy powerful magnetic fields. Hell, if that's the case, wouldn't supernovae just be cranking same up to 12?
THEN I started thinking, "say, aren't we constantly looking for this hugely-disproportionate explanation for the universe's seemingly-excessive amount of gravity? The one we invented dark matter and dark energy to explain away? The one we've not made any headway toward proving? And isn't it the "hole" in an exciton that generates its energetic magnetism, which there's solid evidence to confirm generates a gravitational field? And, sort of by definition, a hole is a hard thing to observe... what with its absence being the very thing that brings about this attraction?"
So, first question: what am I missing? I struggle to believe this just popped up as the first appearance of such a notion, to me specifically, especially. Second, if there's nothing definitive suggesting this IS merely insane hubris on my part, does anyone know of a line of reasearch being pursued, or additional resources I might on this topical line?
