In quantum theory carries of the electrimagnetic fields (and forces of interactions) are photons, not electrons. Similarly, hypothetic caeriers of gravitational fields (and forces if interactions) are gravitons. Both are massless particles. Your consideration is irrelevant.

Reconsidering the hierarchy of forces in nature requires re-evaluating the current understanding of fundamental interactions—gravitational, electromagnetic, weak nuclear, and strong nuclear forces—alongside emerging perspectives from quantum gravity, dark matter/energy, and potential new physics beyond the Standard Model. Some key reconsiderations include:

1. Unification Challenges and Beyond the Standard Model

• The Standard Model successfully unifies electromagnetism and weak nuclear forces into the electroweak force, but the strong nuclear force (quantum chromodynamics) remains separate.
• Grand Unified Theories (GUTs) attempt to merge the strong force with the electroweak force, yet no experimental confirmation has been found.
• String theory and loop quantum gravity propose a deeper unification, incorporating gravity, but empirical validation is lacking.

2. Gravity’s Special Status and Potential Modifications

• Gravity is the only force not explained within the Standard Model, as it is described by General Relativity rather than quantum field theory.
• Efforts to quantize gravity (e.g., via gravitons or string theory) challenge the conventional hierarchy, where gravity is usually considered the weakest force but dominates at macroscopic scales.
• Alternative theories, such as entropic gravity or emergent gravity, suggest that gravity might not be a fundamental force but rather a statistical emergent phenomenon.

3. Dark Matter and Dark Energy: Unaccounted Forces?

• Observations of galactic rotation curves and cosmic expansion suggest the presence of dark matter and dark energy, which may imply new forces or modifications to existing theories.
• Some hypotheses propose fifth forces or modifications to Newtonian/Einsteinian gravity (e.g., MOND or scalar field interactions).
• If dark matter interacts via unknown forces, it could imply an extension of the fundamental forces beyond the traditional four.

4. The Role of Contextuality and Scale

• The importance of different forces varies with energy scales and length scales:At quantum scales, the weak force governs particle decay. At nuclear scales, the strong force dominates. At macroscopic scales, electromagnetism determines molecular and atomic interactions. At cosmic scales, gravity becomes dominant.
• Could a new framework exist where force hierarchies shift dynamically based on scale or environmental conditions?

5. Nonlocal and Emergent Forces

• Quantum entanglement suggests nonlocal correlations that challenge the classical force-based view of interactions.
• Some physicists propose that entanglement itself may underpin spacetime structure and gravity (e.g., ER=EPR conjecture).
• If forces are emergent rather than fundamental, the concept of hierarchy may need to be reinterpreted.

Dear all - generally I prefer to use "potential energy" rather than "forces" in my works - but the results would be the same:

r·m·φg = -Gg·M·m = -N·n·(ħ·c)

r·q·φe = Ge·Q·q = Z·z·(α·ħ·c)

Also notice that "Photons" only exist in interactions, but have no independent existence - while "Gravitons" are still hypothetical and have never been detected, and if detected, would also only exist in interactions, but would have no independent existence - just like photons.

To construct an analogy: If a wind blows across a harp and generates discrete frequencies - it is not the wind that is quantized, but the harp is indeed quantized. The same applies to elementary- and atomic entities with respect to light, as if a broadband light "blows" across elementary- and atomic entities and generate discrete frequencies - it is not the light that is quantized, but the elementary- and atomic entities are indeed quantized.

Furthermore, while I use the classical potentials φg ~ 1/r and φe ~ 1/r in this discussion, I generally use potentials that are solutions of the respective differential equations - such as φe ~ sin(k·r)/r which emerges as a solution of the general Maxwell-Gauss equations in Natural Space.

The current hierarchy of fundamental Nature Gravity, Weak, Electric,, and Nuclear/Strong forces is well determined experimentally, say for protons , the strengths relate as 6.14x10-36:?:1:100.

Why that is I Matter? – this problem is fundamentally outside physics, that is determined by Matter’s design, which for fundamentally unknown for humans reasons makes Matter to be as it is,

- however answering How that is realized in Matter? is possible,

- though only in Planck scale physics, where evidently necessary in this case question “What is particle?” can be answered.

Both last questions with a well non-zero probability are answered in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s Planck scale informational physical model, two main papers arehttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics, [ in the paper section 2.9 “Mediation of the forces in complex systems” can be passed since this is more comprehensively given in section 6.“Mediation of the fundamental forces in complex systems” in other paper below] , and

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383127718_The_Informational_Physical_Model_and_Fundamental_Problems_in_Physics

Including about what are, and why their hierarchy is as it is, Gravity, Electric, and Nuclear/Strong Forces see section “Mediation of the fundamental forces in complex systems” in 2-nd link.

To read SS posts in https://www.researchgate.net/post/NO47What_is_Force_a_Field_Where_is_the_Force_Field_How_does_it_appear_Is_the_Force_Field_a_Regulating_Effect_of_the_Energy-Momentum_Field/2, pages 1,2 , it is useful as well.

Cheers