# Why is gravity the weakest force if, theoretically, it is made up of all the other forces' fields?

I'm quite new to the physics world and want to get an idea as to how physicists have been able to sum all fields/forces (higgs boson, electromagnetic, weak force, strong force etc) in a said object, and determine that this summation is equal to the object's gravitational field.

From what I've heard, I have understood that you can calculate (through mass-energy equivalence) these individual forces' mass counterpart and some how summate them to determine the "net" mass - which is somehow related to the gravitational "field" of said object. Now, I know this makes no sense to me, especially considering that gravity is the weakest of the forces (how can all forces summated give the weakest one?) and how these calculations/conclusions be made. Anyone who can link me to an article concerning this, or has an explanation, thank you very much.

• Um... who said that the summation of all those forces yields gravity? – niels nielsen Apr 9 at 3:32
• – anna v Apr 9 at 4:46
• @nielsnielsen - Why not, if the no-hair theorem (for example) says that all black hole can be completely characterized by only three externally observable classical parameters: mass, electric charge, and angular momentum? Why not, if the Equivalence Principle (for example too) was successful when justifies the similarity between inercial mass and gravitational mass, regardless the others matter fields? Why not, if gravity is the only field directly proporcional to the mass? I think theses aspects are clear examples that denounce the synthesis of matter in gravity. – João Bosco Apr 10 at 1:10