Well first off, the Chronoverse is a fictional universe that may or may not have any relevance to anything in reality. Any game theory you come up with about the nature of time must predict with reasonable certainty all or most time travel aspects within the games.
Thought provoking stuff though, and welcome to the Time, Space, and Dimensions Forum!
Now, as far as it is rendering the Marle Paradox moot, I'm assuming you mean that at that particular moment in time Marle ceases to exist because the universe has become a new Prime Universe in which Marle doesn't exist in the first place, right? Well, then there are problems with this. If you take the standpoint that the past, present, and future do not exist simulataneously but rather there is an "absolute present" at any given time, then there is no problem with Marle ceasing to exist as per your theory. However, you would also have to explain why Time Travellers Immunity/Time Bastard seem to be present and why PTime wouldn't also invalidate those in normal cases when it seems to be invalidating Marle's TTI by the very action of her ceasing to exist.
And while we are on the topic of real-world science, I just
have to comment on a few things since your post makes a large number of scientific statements which are wrong:
In Chrono terms, the Non-Prime Universes are then sent to the Darkness Beyond Time. In non-Chrono terms, the Non-Prime Universes are still extant, but the temperature is stuck at Absolute Zero. Why? Because there is only a finite amount of energy, all of which gets allocated to each new Prime Universe.
Even at absolute zero there is still energy within the system. It possesses zero-point energy. A more correct description would be that at absolute zero there is no energy transference to other systems, and that the energy at absolute zero is the
minimum amount of energy possible for a system.
Time does NOT act on gravity. It is, rather, the other way around. Time acts on the Electroweak and Strong Nuclear forces. That is all.
What a strange concept. What do you mean by this? By "action" you seem to imply that time acts like a force on the other fundamental forces of the universe. But this is not so. Space-time is a singular construct, and the particles that convey the fundamental forces of the universe such as the electromagnetic, electroweak and strong, and probably gravity too (once gravitons are discovered) reside within space-time and therefore are subject to both space and time. If your position is that time is not relevant to gravity, then should we not rewrite every single basic physics book that has time as a fundamental quantity to evaluate the position of an object due to the force of gravity?
Electrons freeze in their very orbits.
See my above analysis. Electrons do not "freeze" in their orbits at absolute zero as this would violate the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in which you cannot know the position and momentum of an electron at any given moment in time. Rather at absolute zero everything in the system, including electrons in their orbit, have the least energy physically possible. And for that matter, electrons don't even "orbit" around the nucleus as planets do around the sun. This is an erroneous concept. Think of the electron orbit more as a probability wave, at which during any given time the electron physically exists at a certain point.
Time as we see it advances because electrons advance from Point A to Point B in our brains, generating our consciousness as they do so.
Yet another strange concept. First off, electrons do not "advance from Point A to Point B" in our brains. The brain
doesn't even use electrons to generate electric flow. It's counterintuitive, I know, since we are often confronted with the example of electrons flowing in wires in every day life. But neurons use an electrochemical ion gradient to generate electrical flow. It is very much like a battery in that there is a charge disparity across the neuronal cell membrane. The electricity doesn't actually "flow" through the neuronal axon as electrons flow in a wire, instead the membrane is electrically depolarized in linear sequence so that net result is a transmission of electrical charge which is not greatly dependent on the physical movement of ions.
And as for this electrical charge "generating our consciousness". If you know something every biologist, neurologist, and physician on the planet doesn't then you deserve a Nobel Prize. Nobody knows what produces consciousness.
We don't even know what it is made of. All we know for sure is that the movement of electricity in our brain does
not directly produce it. Instead, it seems to be the structural organization of the electromagnetic fields that result from that movement of activity that are important, which explains why consciousness is only associated with higher and "simpler" functions in the human and animal brain despite the fact that the unconscious mind performs much more complicated calculations. But we are no closer to figuring it out than we were fifty years ago.
Time as it actually has effect on the universe exist as an extremely fast skipping from one set of probabilities to the next.
And in this quote do you mean to imply that time is an illusion, and that we need our conscious minds to experience it? This would seem to invalidate the rest of your theory that time only acts on certain forces of the universe, and it would beg the question - "how did time pass before conscious beings existed?"
It is true that the sense of time is derived from the brain, and you can even completely shut down that sense of time using certain psychoactive chemicals - thus allowing an individual to
perceive eternity. But this subjective sensation should not be confused with the objective conclusion that the persons consciousness is literally
outside of time.
But perhaps I misinterpreted you here, and what you really meant was that our
conscious sensation of the passage of time is different from how time really is in objective reality. And you say that the true nature of time is a constantly shifting set of probabilities, which we do not perceive.