Sure. The mission was to find a new way to approach how software is constructed. The result is called Kayia and it's here:
http://kayia.org/kayia.pdf
It hit 'singularity' (everything came down to a graph edge; the system is comprised of nothing else) in 2005. I've had some great advisors and the feedback is consistent, “That it’s unique is not interesting if it's not compelling. Show how it’s compelling.” So I’ve stumbled with my limited resources over the years to do that and I’ve come up with a database, of all things, but it’s actually the "programming language" masquerading as a database.
I'm thinking of offering it as a service and if you want to see where that's going, it's at http://www.kayadb.com (although it’s not meant to be looked at yet). I'll do a Tell HN when in a few weeks when it's closer to being ready to show.
It's not ready yet. It's NoSQL, scales to 4EB on the back-end but handles the relational model. Not open source for varying reasons. It will be a service at first. But it's not ready yet. I'll definitely let HN know when it is, and if anyone wants to be an early user, please contact me.
I feel for you... creating a better paradigm is a compelling problem but also can be a seductive trap.
It's hard to have new paradigm without compelling "front end" - either a powerful tool or some really simple example code.
Another thought; software development is plagued by a set of "typical problems". Another way to present a new paradigm would be to show a few problems with a discussion of how your approach would get around them.
The world is full of powerful languages. Their problem is that they give you a bigger cannon to shoot yourself in the foot with after a point.
If you want to create a truly "amazing new paradigm", show ways that you would either untangle an existing mess or ways you'd prevent that mess from happening.