Advancing the Standard Model of physics

A few years ago, when I first started pulling together my ideas for Theory of Thought, I came to the conclusion that a concise model would be the best method for explaining the relationships between my ideas. It needed to be visual, because relationships can be complicated to describe. I could use words in my models, and I would, namely 'symmetry', 'attraction', and 'negation', but it's tedious to explain the depth of ideas using words alone.

'A picture is worth a thousand words'.

In a nutshell, I finally set up the fundamental model as a basic expression of positivity versus negativity. Its a very simplistic and popularized idea of duals. In my model, positivity (symmetry) and negativity (negation) are not exact opposites, but dualistic partners working together in some structured mechanism (called attraction). Attraction is the interactive mechanism between the duals. Because of the existence of attraction, the initial model of a dual evolves into a model of a triad.

I believe this triad of concepts, the inside, outside, and the border between the two, is universally fundamental. So I proceeded to overlay onto the fundamental model, the three families of particles in physics: quarks (hadrons), light (bosons), and electrons (leptons). It produced a very elegant symmetry, that transcends many aspects of the FM. The elegance is achieved when one considers all the meanings, shapes, numbers, and letters associated with the overlaid model. But what the model describes at heart is that quarks and electrons, positivity and negativity, interact together using light. It also says that light is found at the top of the triad, so it is the initial component (bosons) that gives rise to the other two components (hadrons + leptons) thru some evolutionary process of complexity. The FM could be read as 'love gives rise to interacting positivity and negativity'. The order of the fundamental model can be read to explain the nature of the Big Bang, the nature of SpaceTime, and the nature of Human beings, among all other fundamental natures.

This type of model helps interpret and merge physics and philosophy. It doesn't change the laws of physics or philosophy, it just reorganizes them. In my opinion, this is the way physics is meant to be interpreted. To this day, physics lacks a unified, visual approach to what it explores. Instead it uses mathematical equations, that were never systematically codified as visualized geometries. I believe there is a need to visualize the integrity of physics and combine these visuals with philosophical models. I believe the universe is symbolic in nature in that it can be represented with meaning and shapes, because, at the end of the day, it's the only way everybody will be able to understand how it all works and what it all means.