I'm all about the creation of some "Unified Theory Of Universe" (or something like this), but I don't think that this is the right way of doing it.
What if, there are only two forces in the universe, one, an attractive force would be gravity, the other, a repulsive force would be the energy which every sub atomic particle possesses.
First of all, you need to specify, what do you understand by "energy". In physics practically everything (maybe except the time and space itself) is somekind of energy - even mass. Besides there are multiple kinds of energy - kinetic, potential, thermal, electric, magnetic, chemical, biological, e.t.c.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy
...each particle is a tiny magnet with a gravitational field line connecting it's north pole to its south pole...
If this would be true, people with equal rest mass would have a different weight at the polar caps and at the equator - but this is not true at all (or at least it wasn't observed up until now). Not only that, but also gravitational and magnetic fields have completely different geometry - gravity is directed towards the center of mass (at least in the case of uniform spheres), while magnetic fields are oriented from one magnetic pole towards the opposite magnetic pole. If anything gravitational fields are more like eleectric fields (only without the expulsion of matter with the same electric charge)
Gravity
(https://files.mtstatic.com/site_4539/2377/0?Expires=1621071858&Signature=PtagZn-xOqsRHQ6tRsyfaDbNSMZhOFLj6z51al0nFbahnhhY6lObMY4daD3gtVACb9uIHvndk5xydv2aN-EvhkITToWQYIgIHSnsSot4phmWV51cPiCkRxPFkYUoY-o4uIqU965~K0zhyff2VH5CiBcJC5d~apNEMNzUG8PY4Q8_&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJ5Y6AV4GI7A555NA)
Electricity
(https://i.stack.imgur.com/u2wRU.png)
magnetism
(https://cdn.britannica.com/73/473-004-A997D846/magnetic-field-bar-magnet-dipole-configuration-approximation.jpg)
Also keep in mind, that all those forces/fields can exist indepenently from each other. Objects with rest masses will be attraccted towards each other, despite their lack of electric charge or magnetic moment. Also a compass needle won't react at all to a static electric field, while a needle made of aluminium will react to electric field but not to a magnetic one.
Look at our Sun - there you have a perfect example of all 3 macroscale forces interacting with each other - Sun has a very strong gravity, a very strong magnetic field and is made mostly of plasma (ions - particles with strong electric charge). Solar flares are caused by magnetic reconnection, which ejects high energy particles into space, despite their gravitational attraction towards the Sun. Sometimes those forces are "struggling" with each other causing the "dance" of plasma filaments above the solar surface. This wouldn't be possible, if all the 3 macroscale forces would be one and the same.
Also learn about the different properties of subatomic particles, which make the source of the 3 fundamental forces of macroscale - each force/field is associated with a different property of a particle (gravity with atomic mass, electricity with the electric charge and magnetism with the quantum spin)
They're not the same thing. Gravity couples to mass whereas electromagnetism couples to electric charge.
Generally I agree that they are not the same, but I would say, that electromagnetism couples with electric charge AND magnetic moment.
Despite the common explanation, I don't think, that magnetism and electricity are two sides of one coin, just as I don't think that one of them has any priority over the other. Why?
1 EM waves have 3 separate and perpendicular directions (components): propagation and electric and magnetic moments. Subatomic particles also have those 3 perpendicular components/directions (remember right hand rule?)
2. All force fields in their static forms exist independently from each other and do NOT interact with each other
3. EM induction requires interaction between 2+ fields, what leads to motion: motion of charged particles induces a secondary magnetic field, while motion of a pernament magnet in (near) a conducting medium induces secondary electric field - there's no priority of electricity over magnetism or the other way around.
For example a neuetron has a magnetic moment despite having a 0 net electric charge (yes I know, that science tries to explain it with it's internal structure, but what matters in the end, is only the resulting 0 net charge)
Could we explain human behaviour by developing a single "Grand Unified Theory" of the brain?
Psychology? Neurobiology?
But generally your question is fundamentally flawed. You can calculate the exact orbit of a celestial body, but can you describe someone's personality and/or emotions using a mathematical formula? Can you calculate someone's taste or personal opinion? Is there even a numerical value, which could describe such things, like love, hate, joy or fear?
Besides in the difference to human behavior, laws of physics won't change because of their mood at a particular moment of time or because their ability to ask "what if" - the fundamental question of science...
Mind you, did you think the video was someone pouring atomic oxygen?
I didn't. My idea was to prove, that oxygen is generally magnetic in many of it's forms, despite you claiming otherwise. I like to observe a lot of interesting data and I've noticed, that many components of atmosphere/ionosphere are greatly influenced by geomagnetic field - and oxygen is among those components
(https://exp-studies.tor.ec.gc.ca/ozone/images/graphs/gl/current_1.gif)