Well, as I am in agreement with you regarding present physics models, and Emergence theory seems to have come from an attempt to proceed from the requirement for an observer that the Copenhagen school insists is the explanation for the double slit experiment, I feel it is flawed from the very outset.

The projection of a 3D quasi-crystal from an 8D crystalline underlying reality I don't really have my head wrapped around, so despite the superficial concatenance with particle physics, I don't hold much stock in it.

I don't really hold much stock in extant theories, as quantum mechanics defies ontological principles, and thus consilience with the rest of science, classical physics continually falls prey to shortcomings, such as dark energy and matter, and even Bohm-de Broglie (Pilot Wave) seems to fail to account for the 'choice' of form that occurs during the double slit experiment, although it presents a decent rationale for how particles do incorporate waveforms.

String theory simply makes no falsifiable predictions, and essentially can be twisted to any potential form, so it's more like a variety of potential descriptions rather than a theory of the universe.

I'm yet to fully grasp how gravity might create electromagnetism as you propose, so I am not yet fully behind your theory either. I haven't written it off, but can't fully endorse it until I feel I completely understand it.