Interesting, yet disappointing. It is not that we will ever discover where Energy came from -- it does not get lost so it does not need to be found -- but Matter can be seen as a special condition of Energy. As such, we know that we live in a result and not in a condition that is, was and always will be the eternal condition. Unfortunately, therefore, Mr. Borchardt, the position you take in is not dissimilar to crossing the street, while trying to get to the middle. You are using arguments in the wrong spots.
Is it possible to show that Matter is a result? Yes, it is easy.
The subatomic reality of matter shows us two distinct realities that are not of one and the same kind.
On the one hand we have quarks (that do not exist by themselves, they are always found in combination with other quarks what are then neutrons or protons), and on the other hand we have electrons (that do not exist by themselves, they are proton-charge neutralizers). Twice we see fundamental parts that are not self-based, yet the neutrons and protons are resulting self-based forms of energy.
The quarks are found in the nuclei of the atoms, while the electrons do not make it to the center (and if they do they do not remain electrons nor do they resolve the material situation); the behaviors are truly distinct from one another and particularly the electrons neutralizing the positive charges of the protons tells us there was indeed a first and then a second. In other words, establishment.
We can declare the quarks to be warped energy, damaged energy. They contain the reason there is matter and why they take up center spot. The electrons got pulled into this reality to neutralize the positive charges of the protons. We have self-based results (neutrons and protons) and other-based results (the electrons).
QM is a charged subatomic reality, with the charge fully experienced between proton and electron. They are fully paired nevertheless, which means that the material universe overall is charged neutrally.
We see again two realities, charged and fully neutral, though this time between QM and the overall outcome; these conditions are truly distinct. That means your position cannot be correct. It is simply not possible that your position is correct. I do recognize a smart brain in your work, but we have to have smartness at all levels, and we cannot incorporate wishful thinking exactly at the level where Gödel told us about 100 years ago how we should approach the overall level.
--
There is another way to undermine your position by realizing that matter is a fundamental transition of Energy, emphasis on fundamental.
The only manner possible for a fundamental change to have occurred is when a prior condition established that. One cannot have a fundamental condition occur fully from an unaffected prior condition; an omelet cannot come from an unbroken egg.
Big Bang theorists make an enormous mistake by not discussing what went wrong in the prior state of the universe. Big Bang theorists are trying to explain the results by pointing at the results and even when considering the prior state, they are not discussing a fundamental threshold that was crossed. They are structurally inept. Never can a result declare how that result came to be. That is like investigating babies to discover how babies are made. That will not provide the answer.
For a fundamental occurrence to take hold, the prior state has to get broken down into two parts, with one part ending up with a self-based quality for some reason. It is the smallest part of the two that does the transitioning. Said differently, if the prior state is of some unified quality, then the lion-share of that energy has to be involved with giving a much smaller part a transformative blow. The lion-share will remain as is (but will be affected nevertheless).
In the Big Whisper theory this is well-explained and well-supported. Yet the storyline is quite distinct from the Big Bang theory. There is no super-hot starting point, there is no cosmic inflation, and the quarks are not from Zone 1, but from Zone 2 (while Zone 3 is the largest Zone). Only Zone 2 experienced the damaging effect of the overall setup.
It is not necessary for this process to have occurred just once, but whether one storyline, or many storylines, they are all showing the same fundamental transition of (some) Energy being warped by the status of that larger setting of Energy doing the punching. This established damaged Energy that is linear and therefore functionally limited, while the non-linear reality of the electrons points us (more) to understanding the full behavior of original Energy.
I won't go into that here, but the following short article already undermines the Big Bang theory as being structurally incompletely. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. You are a smart person. I hope we can get that last kink out of the cable.
'The Big Bang Egg'
(About what is wrong with the Big Bang theory and discussing the first steps how it can get improved.)
