accelerating universe conundrum, help me find my logic flaw please

On Jun 16, 11:44*am, "Painius" wrote:

...it is so important to realize that any
idea, good or bad, that is the offspring of a trip to
our imaginations must be subject to the evidence
that can be determined...

* *in this frame of reference, i.e., from the
* *perspective of scientific scrutiny on planet
* *Earth.

All else, whether sound or frivolous, is speculation
without evidence to back it up.

....Unless, by its numerous cross-congruent 'sidebars' and spinoffs,
it addresses and answers such issues as : Unification of gravity with
the SNF, seamless conciliation of QM and relativity, resolution of
"dark matter/ dark energy", whether the universe is open-ended or
closed.. which bears on the biggest questions in cosmology, like the
ultimate fate of the universe. If the theory is elegant, rational, and
easily understood by the layman without need for math, and if it shows
all the fundamental forces and "particles" reducible to *processes* of
One Flow driven by One Force in the Unified Field of Spatial Flows,
then, based on the law of probability (vis-a-vis "uncertainty"), the
theory holds a better chance of being true, than not.