In other words, if you can't break it down into 1s and 0s, or it doesn't meet your limited understanding, your "theories", then it can't possibly be true. I "made up" nothing and if you aren't aware that today's "science" will not be tomorrow's "science" then you're taking the same attitude the medieval Church used with Galileo. You don't understand something so you brush it off as not possibly being true.

A 'scientist' who refuses to take all possible factors into account is a poor excuse for a scientist.

I truly hope you realize that you don't know everything and open your mind to things outside of what you know today about "science". Not everything can be measured physically. Can you determine both the location and velocity of a subatomic particle at the same time? You're well aware that that can't be done, yet there's no scientific proof that it can. So, explain that for, in your "physical" realm. Oh, but you can't because no scientist can. So, it can't be true because you can't explain it. All past great scientists have been open to things they didn't yet understand. Recall that Einstein' Theory of Relativity didn't allow for quantum mechanics, yet it exists.

I think I have nothing left to say, except the 'shape' of the universe I described coincides with the theories of many other scientists. You even used an image that is quite close to what I experienced- is that image you used true or just something you choose to believe? Your call- is it your belief or just something you don't believe but it makes a nice image to begin your story? Remember, scientists, according to you, need "evidence".

Good day