This approach to universal dynamics is entirely controversial and no there are no specific links I can direct you to.
However the question is obviously to any one regardless of academic qualification are:
How can a centre of anything be anything but zero?
How can a center of gravity NOT be zero?
Example: determine the centre of gravity for a large cloud mass... where would you find it and how would you determine it in absolute terms.
At a fundamental level zero is the sum of all things....if you think about it zero does indeed equal +1 + (-1)
and yes I am aware that this provokes issues of credibility and the call to authority. Yet the logic is simple and fairly straight forward and those authorities [ not naming names ] here at sciforums are way too busy trying to block discussion than actually dealing with that simple and straight forward logic and natural, intuitive extensions.
Example determine the value of the centre of a perfect sphere? the answer must be zero.
Imagine an infinitesmally small sphere. What is it's volume in three dimensional space? [no mathematics required as the answer can only be zero]
If the theoretical Higgs Bosun has a material based premise then what is at it's center?
(Ignore the pesky asterisks)
I can see how someone could take you to task over the concept that the center of anything has to be zero. If you**refer to the perfectly balanced point in space where the gravitational attraction of the system is the same in all directions, I would refer to that point as the center of gravity, not zero. There is a value of the gravitational attraction for that point in all directions, but that value in terms of the force of gravity isn't zero, it is a positive value. Zero might be the net gravitational value if you say that each vector has a positive value in one direction and a negative value in the opposite direction, but it seems more appropriate to me to think of the vectors originating at the center of gravity, not as bi-directional lines passing completely through the gravitational field, each having a plus and a minus component in opposite directions from the center.*
*Take the center of gravity of the Earth/Moon system. *It falls at a point in empty space between them and moves relative to their motions. Those calculations are probably seen as simple in the scientific community, and every direction from that center of gravity has a positive value, I would think.
Nothing about that determination makes me think that a definition of that point equates to zero. Saying it is obviously zero makes me suspect that your view has to do with a particular hypothesis, and that suspicion might be reinforced by your view that "This approach to universal dynamics is entirely controversial and no there are no specific links I can direct you to".
As for the escape velocity analogy and the constant distance/time value showing scalloping, I may be vague on your point when you have a decreasing and an increasing variable. *I'm just not sure that escape velocity and a constant d/t value are consistent, but that is just my lack of understanding of the physics involved without doing a little research and not a comment on the validity of your hypothesis. I don't think I can be of much help.
As for the theoretical Higgs boson, I have my own delusions. It wouldn't add anything to your thread to air them but I will say a Higgs boson has a center of gravity just like any object
.