I always try to help people shape their models to overcome what I perceive as flaws (lol, yes, it was I who said that). You have my take on your efforts, and your further explanations are reinforcing my view that it is too contrived. It seems to be a forced effort to explain an ether model by suggesting you have some source of knowledge, through you success in decoding an other-worldly document. You are struggling to make sense of it yourself, and that leaves the reader confused and skeptical. Two things, which I think I detect, and 1) is you are trying to explain a perfectly symmetrical state as the beginning, and explaining the first event as Yin and Yang units that occurred to break the symmetry. Symmetry sometimes seems to be offered as an explanation for the preconditions to what is now the grand old universe, but there is never an explanation for cause of symmetry breaking that isn't something already inherent in the state of perfect symmetry. For example like quantum fluctuations, if they weren't always there, where did they come from and 2) it still begs the question of where did the pre-universal state of symmetry come from; how do we explain its existence before those Yin and Yang fluctuations?