The best way to help you understand why ultrawave theory is better than the Standard Model is to give you some comparisons between the two theories. These comparisons will be based on the basic constituents of the SM simply for the reason that there are so many more of them required to explain the nature of the Universe. Once you see how simple ultrawave theory is when compared to the SM, you will wonder how so many different explanations were cobbled together in the first place. Since UT was originally designed as an alternative explanation for the creation of matter, that will be the focus of the first comparison.

SM: The items needed to explain the creation of matter in the SM, as well as their interactions through different types of forces are in no particular order:

Electron - a point particle that cannot be broken down into smaller entities    Electron neutrino - a neutral particle associated with electron interactions     Muon - a larger relative of the electron (about 206 time heavier)                 Muon neutrino - larger neutrino associated only with muon interactions        Tauon - an even heavier electron relative (approx. 16 times the muon mass)  Tauon neutrino - even larger neutrino associated only with tauon interactions   Quarks: up / down/ top / bottom / strange / charmed - (aslo indivisible)      

Bosons: photons / W / Z / gluon / Higgs / graviton (last two are unconfirmed) These particles are the spin-1 force mediators that allow spin-1/2 particles to interact electromagnetically, gravitationally, and via the weak and strong nuclear forces. They are supposed to be massless, except for the Higgs.

Including anti-particles, the total number of particles is twenty four. These are the basic particles that cannot be broken down into lesser components.

There are other theories that have not been incorporated into the SM, such as Supersymmetry that has particles with super partners, but these types of theories are beyond the SM and do not need to be described here.

A lot of complicated interaction rules have been applied to the SM components that explain their behaviors and how they combine. The math required to achieve some of these behaviors is daunting, and in some cases cannot be renormalized. Renormalization just means that an equation can be made to give a real answer rather than a non-sensical answer. It is an ad-hoc system that has as many drawbacks as advantages.

UT: There are no basic particles in UT, there are instead two types of two-dimensional waves. There is the flat membrane, or brane wave that travels at light speed, and the circular traveling ultrawave that rotates at 8.936E+16 m/s. Ultrawaves combine with brane waves to create not just the spin-1/2 matter particles, but also the other spin types. The spin-1/2 particles include the SM fundamental components, as well as much larger versions that have similar properties. Many of these larger particles are actually atomic nuclei. Because the same waves are used to create bosons, these spin-1 particles are also mass carriers. The same goes for neutrinos; they are also mass carriers. All types of matter and energy are transmutable simply because they are already similar in construction.

As unbelieveable as it may seem, any feature of the SM concerning mass, energy, or matter creation in any form can be explained quite easily by the UT string/brane model with very simple math.

GRAVITY: The second item I would like to compare is gravity, but the SM cannot handle gravity. Outside of postulating a graviton particle, there is currently no way to describe gravity using the same processes as matter creation. This is not true of UT. By using ultrawaves—that have a specific velocity—, it is easy to show that mass concentration on the particle level produces gravitational attraction in a mass per unit volume manner. As mass increases, so does gravity. There is no limit to a two-dimensional compression of waves, but since ultrawaves must create matter as three-dimensional, there is a limit that can be calculated. Instead of a singularity as the focal point of a black hole, a matter torus with specific mass to volume ratio can be shown as the creator of a black hole. The event horizon is therefore proportional to the mass, as the mass/volume ratio of all black holes is the same.