Independent verifcation
In the scientific manner, when one makes a claim, be it mathematical or otherwise, the first step towards gaining acceptance is for an independent source to be able to verify your work and findings.
When Jerry Patterson was peddling his TARGET garbage back in the '80s, and I challenged him to describe the methodology to a third party, so that simulation verification could be established, his timeless, classic response was, "This can't can be simulated. TARGET is above the mathematics of the game!" My partner, Ken Feldman, and I immediately disassociated ourselves from Jerry and the Blackjack Clinic franchise that we owned and operated at the time.
You have two choices: 1) Continue to believe that you have a non-card-counting system with a positive edge, and finance your play yourself. Go out and have a great time. (I refrain from saying, Go out and win millions, because, obviously, I know that isn't going to happen, but I'm trying to be civil and polite.) 2) Submit your system to a skilled, respected simulation expert for independent verification. Norm Wattenberger would, of course, be my first choice, but others on this board, such as Dog Hand, would surely also qualify, along with Mike Shackleford, for example.
If outside sources find any validity in your system, their endorsement will be worth 1,000 times more than the personal findings and claims that you have been making. A positive result from the experts will lend instant credibility to your approach, and you shouldn't then have trouble finding backers and/or team players.
Now, of course, I don't for a minute believe that the latter will happen, but that shouldn't deter you from following your dream. Just don't be disappointed if a) you play on your own and can't win, or b) you submit your system to scrutiny, only to have the authorities tell you that it isn't valid.
Good luck to you.
Don