Hi Peter,
Thanks, I read your paper, as an actual attempt to solve an outstanding problem it not only justifies a high score but is a fine article.
>I have a heap of other angles on the same theme if you're interested.
I would appreciate that. Maybe easiest if I give you references to my work (and vice-versa). Essentially mine is a geometrical model that reduces the universe to the 3 dimensions of motion; Planck momentum, velocity -c and Planck time tp. It is a Planck unit theory whereby particles dictate the frequency of the Planck units.
download paper, also online calculator to verify formulas. I also have equations for gravity and the CMB (relating to my essay) on the same site. There is also a non-technical introduction online, maybe easier if I send you a pdf. My email: mail4malcolm@gmx.de.
Notes in regard to your paper presented here
>Your binary comets analogy.
Curiously I arrived at the same concept of internal spin (dual circle within circle) in order to rationalise the time and mass dilation of relativity.
>We've never found a 'monopole'. How could one exist?
I have a simple formula for a magnetic monopole which seems to resemble a quark and which I use to solve the mass of the electron and the ultra-precise (to 12-digits) Rydberg constant (see electron)
>One point I'd question; the lifetime of the universe.
I took mine as when the universe temperature Tmin reaches absolute zero. It may be that the universe expands as does an atom, adding orbitals... if so then we will see cycles as 1 energy level is filled and the next energy level begins. Easy to calculate if interested.
>The fight for attention is against all the odds
Over the last 100 years there have been some very smart people working on these problems, if they haven't solved them by now it may be that their intial premise, the very basic assumptions of physics, are wrong... so at least we have the luxury of not being constrained to an orthodoxy.
Looking forward to hearing back from you!
Cheers,
Malcolm