AS for the maths involved, someone else would have to work that out.

Unfortunately, science judges ideas almost entirely on their ability to use mathematics to model reality. Without any mathematical basis, an idea is basically scientifically useless.

Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.

I had an idea, sadly the to learn the maths I would have to learn to form a mathematical model for this idea would probably take quite a few years, plus quiet a few year of study into nuclear psychics.

Needless to say it's a lot of effort just to draw up a model of an idea that could be wrong.

At least this way possibly someone else that does have the knowledge could look into it and possibly draw up a model.

The first step in it all is thinking up ideas that possibly could explain the reasons why things happen as they do.

I can draw what I mean, turning that into maths is something else entirely.

but no ideas are not scientifically useless they are the basis of an hypothesis.

If this idea was right, it could explain why there is so little material, yet things are solid.

Why electrons move in a number of ways and forms, a bubble would ripple esp on impact, yet be still at moments, it could also move in relation to other bubble energies(attraction repulsion) like a hot air balloon on it's side while one side huge the other small(a repulsion from the nucleus, yet connection kept). And Maybe even why instrumentation effects them.

But it's just an idea, as a hypothesis it's OK, it is how well the models explain what we can see that ultimately decides but as you say, the model needs maths.