First, a scientific hypothesis is testable. How can your idea be tested?
Secondly, after the formulation of the testable hypothesis, the actual testing follows. Preferably with a control group according to scientific protocols.
Third, comes the writing of a paper in which you detail the experiment, the methods used, the potential problems with it and follow that up with the results of the experiment and then formulate a conclusion.
Fourth, comes the submitting of said paper to an appropriate journal where it will receive a first evaluation through peer review to see if it is up to standards for publication.
Fifth, comes actual publication.
Sixth, readers of said journal (more peers, around the world this time) read and evaluate the paper, perhaps repeat the experiment or build further on it. They repeat this entire process.
After all that is done and if the community of the field accepts the results by consensus after heavily scrutinizing the entire thing from all angles, then you have a hypothesis that gets promoted to theory.
You have done none of this.
Instead, you seem to have skipped all 6 steps and jumped straight to pretending as if your idea has any merrit.
You haven't even bothered to formally formulate your idea in testable form to make it worthy of the name "hypothesis".
As usually, this is just one big bad joke.
