Well, then, I bet you can quickly point me to a potentially disconfirming experiment, right?
Your claim isn't, in my opinion, as good as the several variations on the claim that fundamental symmetries in the nature of the initial quantum event, had to resolve themselves into well-kempt laws. Until there is a differentiating experiment--my claim stands on as much scientific grounds as yours, or maybe a little better, since I can make a grab at Occams razor, because I'm not required to then try to examine and explain the nature of the entity mysteriously behind it all.
"fundamental symmetries in the nature of the initial quantum event"?
What fundamental symmetries? And wouldn't those be prior to the existence of many of the particles in question? And wouldn't the inital energy of the quantum event have to be set beforehand? Or would that also be in flux?
And why an initial quantum event at all with no cause?
"I can make a grab at Occams razor, because I'm not required to then try to examine and explain the nature of the entity mysteriously behind it all."
Right. With your theory you are not required to. I keep my mind open to that possibility as well. But, seeing as there is a theory that says the universe IS a creation, and it's a pretty good theory, then it might not be a bad idea for you to conjecture about "the nature of the entity mysteriously behind it all" as an extension of considering it. Seriously: What if?
PS - I'd be much obliged if you recommend an article regarding the theory you spoke of (of fundamental symmetries at the initial quantum event).