Thank you for your answer.

Wow that's a mess. You are mixing bits of Newtonian gravity with parts of general relativity and a dash of hypothetical quantum gravity theories so I'm not surprised that mess makes no sense. Pick a theory and stick with it is my advice and if it turns out to be the wrong theory for the regime you are considering then pick a different one and start over.

Not really.

I am aware of the specificity of theses theories.

I am here talking about Newtonian force because i think all become more clear with this theorie.

Newtonian law apply with short distances and no motion : So the problem evocated remain the same.

How can you have a 1/d2 force present

**at every position of a volume** without having a problem with the total energy you potentialy can use ???

This is non-sense.

Newton could not know that because energetic considerations were not usual at his epoch.

But now we suppose energy can not appear from nothing.

Huh? Why do you think that? And what do you mean only act on a surface? The inverse square law falls out of the flux integral over a spherical surface round a point source being independant of distance yes but that depends on all of those integration surfaces making up a 3d space and the force being defined everywhere in it.

Because if you consider the force acting on the surface of a sphere you see that 1/(d*d) "is counteract" (in some kind) by the pi*d*d (surface) and so if you multiply 1/(d*d) by d*d you supress the variable d (the distance).

No energy gained.

But here : it is like you have an addition of infinitesimal surfaces of spheres (making a volumic sphere therefore the sum by integration) and with this you have a gain of energy.

**Huh? In Newtonian gravity the gravitational field propagates instantly so it affects everywhere all at once**. If you want to talk about finite propagation speeds and gravity you need to use GR but in GR gravity is spacetime curvature and not a force and your Newtonian formula is the wrong thing to be using you need to work with the Einstein field equations.

Sure.

But this is not the point.

I talked about this other "anomaly" because it can perhaps make understand the real behaviour of the gravitation (but this is more complicated).

Huh? What do you mean by total intensity of a force?

The integration of the force you can potentialy use at every point of the volumic sphere.

If you understand well, using a force somewhere dosent affect the use of the force at an other place (unlike the electromagnetic wave... wich is a quantic object).

There are similarities between gravity and electromagnetism and in fact there's a weak field approximation to GR where the field equations simplify to exactly the same form as Maxwell's equations but they are not exactly the same in the full theory.

Yes but gravity doesent weaken as used.

Where did you get the idea gravity isn't quantised? Classical gravity theory isn't quantised by definition sure but actual gravity is almost certainly quantised but nobody knows how to write the theory yet and nobody can do experiments in the kind of regime where we'd expect to see quantum behaviour yet.

I dident say gravity can not be quantised (graviton is a quantisation)

I said it doesent fit the quantum mechanic because using a quantum of the field somewhere do not weakens the field at other places.

Gravity uses graviton but graviton dosent expand like other particles (this is what i say).