We argue that any non-Abelian gauge theory with a simple gauge group generically induces, at the two-loop level, a universal long-range spin-2 interaction whose tensor structure matches that of linearized general relativity. The primary mechanism is the two-gauge-boson exchange amplitude via box diagrams, where the gauge-singlet projection and Lorentz tensor decomposition isolate a symmetric traceless spin-2 component coupling universally to the energy-momentum tensor. The parametric scaling is Gᵢnd ∼ α²NG cbox/M²G, where α is the gauge coupling, NG the number of generators of the unified group at the unification scale, cbox the Passarino–Veltman loop coefficient, and MG the unification scale. With Standard Model parameters (αG ≈ 1/25, NG = 24, MG = 2 × 10¹6 GeV) and an estimated cbox = 1/12, the leading-order result is Gᵢnd/GN ≈ 3. 8. This should be understood as an order-of-magnitude estimate: the exact coefficient cbox for the spin-2 projected two-gauge-boson exchange has not been computed in the published literature to our knowledge. The Sakharov–Adler one-loop induced gravity mechanism, which generates an Einstein–Hilbert term in the effective action, is shown to be negligible for the Standard Model: the one-loop contribution is opposite in sign (repulsive) and 31 orders of magnitude smaller than the box diagram contribution. The scalar (spin-0) channel of the induced action is decoupled: the scalaron mass mₛ ∼ 10¹7 GeV lies above the effective field theory cutoff, producing Yukawa suppression of order e^ (−10⁴4) at solar system distances. The Stelle ghost is likewise above the cutoff. The low-energy theory from the box diagram is pure Einstein–Hilbert. No composite massless spin-2 pole exists in the gauge theory's stress-tensor correlator. The induced graviton is not a particle but a collective spin-2 response of the gauge vacuum—the phonon of the effective field theory, not a fundamental quantum. The Weinberg–Witten theorem is satisfied, not evaded: it forbids a composite spin-2 particle, and the framework claims a collective response.
Ian Reynolds (Sat,) studied this question.