[ron123456 (OP)]

Please leave out space time if perhaps possible?..….Why would an object spinning cause a gravitational force?.....Why would spinning cause a force outward or inward?..... 

[Bored chemist]

Why would an object spinning cause a gravitational force?

It wouldn't- particularly.
The gravity would be the same if it was spinning or not.
Two rocks will attract each other gravitationally, they don't need to spin.

[ron123456 (OP)]

Yea...but what about all the intrinsic stuff?

[Bored chemist]

Yea...but what about all the intrinsic stuff?

What stuff?
You really  need to put more effort into constructing a meaningful question.

[ron123456 (OP)]

I apologize......Why would any atomic particle spinning cause a gravitational force?

[Bored chemist]

For the same reason that a non spinning one would.
It has mass.
Gravity and spinning are not closely related.

[evan_au]

Why would an object spinning cause a gravitational force?

The Sun's gravitational attraction on the Earth would be essentially identical whether it was spinning about once per month (as it does at present), once every 10 hours (as Jupiter does), or not at all.

Spinning objects do produce a very subtle gravitational effect called "frame dragging", which was derived from Einstein's General Theory of Relativity by Lense+Thirring in 1918.

However, the effect is so small that satellite measurements made with the Gravity Probe B satellite in the past 20 years were not accurate enough to detect the effect reliably.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging#Experimental_tests

[Halc]

The source of gravity is a function of energy/mass, so a spinning wheel (or a warmer one for that matter) technically has more energy than does the same wheel not spinning, and hence exerts more gravity if you go to enough decimal places.

This is a very naive description, and the actual frame invariant gravitational field is computed via a tensor, which you probably don't want to hear about if we're to avoid mention of spacetime.

[ron123456 (OP)]

I will give it a go if you are patient....Please inform...thx Halc

[Kryptid]

Please leave out space time if perhaps possible?

Why?

[alancalverd]

Make sure you aren't as confused as Eric Laithwaite about angular momentum - a whole different thing. The man was an engineering genius with a blind spot about physics - most unusual.

[Bored chemist]

Make sure you aren't as confused as Eric Laithwaite about angular momentum

He wasn't the only one.
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=80717.msg610421#msg610421

[ron123456 (OP)]

Mass has to have a reason to cause the force of gravity.....Yes gravity is an intrinsic property of mass.....But, basically what makes gravity a function of mass?.... Does spin of the total atomic internal particles of each atom contribute to gravity?  Space time is bewildering still and that is why I tried to leave it out at this time...That is basically my question...thx again

[Bored chemist]

Mass has to have a reason to cause the force of gravity

Says who?

[ron123456 (OP)]

Do you believe that gravity just occurs magically with a constant?....no way!!...I don't think?...but what else is new?

[Bored chemist]

Do you believe that gravity just occurs magically with a constant?

The universe doesn't care what you or I believe.
But that's what the experiments show.

[Kryptid]

Does spin of the total atomic internal particles of each atom contribute to gravity?

Nope. The spin of a nucleus is unrelated to its mass (and therefore its gravity). Let's use iron as an example. Iron-58 is heavier than iron-57, which is heavier than iron-56. Iron-56 has a spin of 0, iron-57 has a spin of 1/2, and iron-58 has a spin of 0. So there is no correlation.

[ron123456 (OP)]

…..I think that this leads to gravitons....