"The Cloverfield Paradox" or how not to do science fiction

I liked "Cloverfield" for it's mystery and new style of directing.
I loved "10 Cloverfield Lane" again for it's mystery, the tension between the characters, the crazy story and the aliens, even though the ending was a bit cheesy.
Now I find myself disliking "The Cloverfield Paradox". This movie is a mess.

First off, SPOILERS!!!!

I'm not gonna give a full review of this movie, but just outline some things I found really out of place and done poorly.

The Cloverfield Paradox seems to be a prequel to the first movies Cloverfield. We get to see why the monsters appeared. It's because humans decided to build a particle accelerator and smash the Higgs boson. Allegedly the accelerator was 1000x more powerful than the most powerful one we have. OK. But why put it into space? They said it's for safety reasons. Well, first off, the accelerator seemed very small compared to something like CERN, how it's a 1000 times more powerful I don't know. Secondly it would cost a crazy amount of money to send something like that into space. So once they get it operational they will start beaming energy back to Earth? Sure, it's possible, but I doubt it's a good solution as the station has to be aiming "microwaves I assume" back to earth at the right location for us to catch it. Anyway, it seems too complex and I see no safety reason why they should have not made this accelerator on earth like CERN is, burried underground.

After they get that thing working the Higgs boson somehow intertwines two dimensions (if not more) and weird things start to happen. This is where the writers went completely crazy and replaced science fiction with senseless fiction. I'm gonna write out a few questions I was asking myself during the film:

1. Why should two dimensions even occupy the same dimension in the first place?
2. Why would they merge in this manner, what decided what stays or doesn't? Why should we get whole monsters from on dimension pass over, wouldn't it make more sense if every second atom of everything passed over? (well, that wouldn't make for a good story)
3. Why would the ship somehow come to life and cut off an arm? Why is that arm alive, controlled by whom and how does it know where to look for the gyro?
4. Why did Volkov go crazy? Why the worms? Why the gun? Why die?
5. How can welding/repair material come alive and kill a person??? How can magnetism appear out of nowhere?
6. How can water appear out of nowhere? How can water freeze instantly if subjected to vacuum?
7. How does gravity exist in space?
8. Why would you want to stay in the wrong dimension and go to Earth to yourself and live with yourself and your (still alive) children?
9. Why where they on the other side of the solar system in the first place and why did the other spacestation crash onto Earth?

I could go on... but nothing made sense in this movie.

This movie also tried to tell us the story of the protagonist's husband on Earth and it didn't work. I really didn't care what happened to him. Also the quality was very different between what happened in space and on Earth. As if the budget for this movie was solely focused on building an awesome spacestation, but not show anything about what happened on Earth. It felt like watching a hollywood movie intertwined with a cheap television series. Also they gave a lot of time to the protagonist to show us her relationship and give us a very long monologue in the end which was totally out of place in my mind.

By the end I was actually glad it ended.
First Cloverfield movie I didn't like.
Lazy writing I say.

Have you seen it? What are your thoughts?