I have an astronomical theory. What do I do with it?

First, I am delighted that you wish to spend your time thinking seriously about astronomy. Non-scientists sometimes believe that astronomy and physics are somehow seriously flawed for philosophical reasons, since they cannot take the time to properly evaluate all of the evidence that has been accumulated over the years to support various scientific ideas. I should warn you, however, that we are long past the time when it is possible to make significant scientific discoveries without first understanding the full breadth of the current investigative process. This is analogous to a jurist thinking that they, too, can be a lawyer just because they sat in on one trial and listened to lawyers. Even the individuals who 'overturned' or radically altered certain aspects of physical science by introducing new ideas, were not new-comers to science and mathematics.

In science, there are standards of evidence that must be adhered to to insure that human imagination does not run wild with experimental evidence. It is improbable that non-scientists studying physics or astronomy can hit upon any genuinely new ideas. I have seen MANY manuscripts written by very ernest individuals, but they are all seriously flawed because:

1) They willfully deny the existence of evidence that refutes central 
tenents of their new theory, 

2) They are unwilling to try to couch their explanations in language that is 
not inflammatory.

3) They do not follow accepted norms of logical deduction.

4) They are convinced that their idea is correct, and that professional 
scientists are hell-bent on stealing their ideas from them. As a result, every 
manuscript that I have ever seen has been copyrighted.

5) They think that science is just another language and that if you use the
verbs and nouns of science in a theory, that that makes the theory scientific.