I think you know the math. Inverse square law. E=mC^2. Boyle's Law. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Newton's Laws of Motion.

I am saying, in effect, that, for example Einstein's formula, is caused by the expansion of space. The inverse square law applies equally to radiation as it does to gravity (surface tension effect). Temperature and pressure are a factor related to photons orbiting atomic nuclei and interfering with electron bonds, competing, if you like. The stochastic behaviour of electrons is because of their primary effect in moving atomic nuclei around, and vice versa. And lastly, gravity does not operate on the subatomic scale simply because it is a phenomena produced by chaotic electrons beyond the boundaries of atomic radii.

I expected the 'math' taunt, and it's a fair call, but to me the math is in the geometry, and it can give instant qualitative information to the visual cortex, that can take a lot of algorithms otherwise. You can see the math operating in the geometry of surface tension and equilibrium visually, same with the mass/energy relationship.

Essentially, I am saying that the reason why Newton fails is also why Quantum physics does not explain gravity.

The recomposition of the understanding of these many well known and relatively simple physics formulae is what I am putting forward, not any new math. Maybe it is my poetic, irish ancestry coming out but for me the first premise was the most important: That space is a solid (the most solid) material, that is constantly halving in size (this respects the 3rd law of thermodynamics, the conservation of energy, while giving an avenue into zero point theories and dark energy), that there is overlaying, interacting patterns created by its fractal and dynamical iterative process, that we already have all the essential formulas, and eventually the more complex ones will be related to the interactions between multiple systems, like photons, electrons, neutrons and protons, plus the complexity and timescale of these phenomena. I agree with Einstein's 'God does not play dice' idea - that through chaos theory, combined with physics, you can find a way to explain and model the phenomena, without having to revert to opaque and cryptic complex mathematics.

No, I don't know how to exactly explain the mechanics of the patterning idea of a primary 'space particle' which I posit is halving or some kind of progression in scale, and why these patterns interact with each other. My working theory has to do with vectors of torque, and the dimensional components, such as, for example, neutrons and protons are 'inert' because they have about 3 rotational vectors, whereas photons and electrons are 'dynamic' because they only have 1 or 2. If you accept the premise that space is expanding, and this happens at the speed of light, then you will grasp that this could mean electrons and photons in fact travel because they lack the third vector which would make them orbit around a central point. The interactions are governed by harmonics, which dictates how close they can get to each other.

I have much more work to do in explaining the hypothesis but I think that answers the math question. I do understand the laws of physics I named above, and I am simply positing an alternative model for the fundamental fabric of space.