Will we ever know if there was something before the big bang?

Steven Hawkin said we live in a black hole rebound universe.If he was right, then there would have been something before that.We would be thrown out of the hole and then fall back in.Everything would repeat itself over and over again.There would be rebirths, always slightly different.Plato talked about something like this 3,000 years ago.

God happened

I can accept the apparent violation of the light-speed-limit in the Big Bang theory by picturing there being no space at all before the BB. Before there was nothing, not even space. Then there was Stuff. The stuff created the space, and the space stretched VERY FAST to accommodate all the stuff.

Picture a big rubber sheet with bugs on it. They can only run so fast. But, if they are near the edge of the sheet, stretch the sheet, and they will still be much closer to the edge than the poor dopey bugs that were near the middle when it happened. Objectively, they have not been scuttling around any faster than all the others, but subjectively, the bugs that were near the middle of the sheet think the edge-bugs are all Housain Bolt with God on their side.

Relativity, man.

For those interested in a more in-depth (popular) scientific analysis of alternative models in relation to cosmological inflation and the Big Bang (along with a discussion of their advantages and potential issues related to them), I encourage you to read [1].

[1] M. Postolak, Did the Big Bang and cosmic inflation really happen? (A tale of alternative cosmological models) (4 2024) (https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.18503, https://cosmoversetensions.eu/learn-cosmology/did-the-big-bang-and-cosmic-inflation-really-happen/).

I'm with Wittgenstein: 'Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.'

Or as Professor Keating said more clearly, “If there isn’t a discriminant you can measure, you’re doing metaphysics with equations.”

Our universe via the big bang could its element not have been the result of a previous big bang

In addition to violating the speed limit C, the Big Bang universe violates the most fundamental law of physics - conservation of mass-energy. The Big Bang universe's mass-energy increases with its volume of expansion since the Standard Lamda CDM model assumes a constant mass-energy density. However, the source of this infinitely increasing energy is unknown - fudged to be the so-called dark energy, which Einstein called his "Biggest Blunder". No wonder, these two fundamental violations result into more than 20 unresolved paradoxes of modern physics and cosmology that are seldom highlighted or emphasized in a mostly "shut-up and calculate" culture of modern science. The highlighted modern scientific successes are limited to about 5% of the material universe or earthly technologies and gadgets such as GPS, quantum computers, cell phones, communications, medicine, planetary predictions etc with a 95% failure rate at the cosmic level. We are blinded by the limited 5% successes ignoring the uncomfortable, depressing, and even embarrassing 95% percent failure in our understanding of the universe.

However, its not all bad news; there exists a missing physics that eliminates the above two fundamental violations and resolves almost all the major paradoxes of modern physics and cosmology revealing the Elegant Universe hidden behind the Absurd Big Bang universe. Stay tuned.

The Big Bang concept violates one of the most fundamental limits in physics: that nothing can exceed the speed of light. I hold that the time, about 13.8 billion years ago, was simply the first time that things cooled to the point that any kind of "memory" could form. By that I mean that whatever particles or waves might have formed would immediately be erased by the high temperature that existed before 13.8 billion years ago. It does not mean that the universe didn't exist before that time, but only that it could not form a memory of particles or waves that we could observe today. Why is that such a difficult concept?

The reason that we will never know if there was something before the Big Bang is that time is merely an illusion. The time history of the Big Bang universe is built upon the presumption that the photon of light emitted from a galaxy far away (Hubble observations) takes billions of years to reach our telescopes. The fact, as per relativity theory, is that the photon itself experiences no time (or distance) in reaching us. If we ask the messenger photon bringing us the information about the observed galaxy, it will tell us that there is no time delay, nor any distance involved during its journey from the seemingly far away galaxy to earth. The Big Bang theory shoots the messenger and asserts that it took billions of years of time and billions of lightyears of travel distance misrepresenting the reality of the universe. I would like to bring attention to – “Why Light Doesn’t Move” (https://youtu.be/x_wKkqQeTMg?si=2fZlRjy0ELyJWSQJ) by Prof. Leonard Susskind to understand the illusory time. However, the Big Bang theory extrapolates the observations of the universe (CMB, expansion data) into the past using the illusory time history to raise and answer the imaginary questions of the moment of Big Bang and what came before it. It is apparent that there could be no answers to these questions, since the questions are related to a fairy tale history of Big Bang. As referenced in my previous post, there are approximately 25 unresolved foundational issues (including the recent Hubble Tension and unexpected mature galaxies observed in the so-called early universe) in modern physics and cosmology. Time is probably the most fundamental misconceived foundational issue that may be the root cause of many of the other issues.

To the editors of Scientific American:

The reputed magazines, such as Scientific American, could play an important and significant role in raising awareness of the scientific community as well as public towards possible alternative non-paradoxical approaches to science to reveal the ultimate reality of the universe. The long list of unresolved paradoxes and the Grand Fragmentation of the universal reality into incomprehensible Multiple Universes are shattering hopes of Grand Unification pointing to a possible dead end of science. It is about time to end the mystery of the “Illusory TIME”.

Consistent with a recent theory, could one substitute Information as the predecessor of time in the discussed theories?

“Not in a million years.” There is so much before us that we still do not understand — take light, for example. Is it a wave or a particle? Can it be both? Or, my guess: neither. Something else entirely.

Neither a Cyclic universe nor a Multiverse with multiple Big Bangs solves the fundamental paradox of the absolute (fixed) moment of time of the beginning of the new cycle of a cyclic universe or the big bang of each parallel universe. The idea of parallel universes emanates from the absence or lack of any physical theory of the collapse of the wavefunction or the fundamental quantum Measurement Problem. Sadly, this interpretation results into the GRAND FRAGMENTATION OF THE EXTREME KIND, shattering all hopes of Grand Unification. Since measurements are used to calibrate and validate theories of science, it is critical that the measurement paradox is resolved to preserve the credibility and viability of science.

I would like to bring attention to a recent publication, Ref. [1] below that proposes the missing or new physics of the collapse of the wavefunction via integrating the effects of gravity, the measurement process, and the observer’s consciousness. It also mathematically describes the boundary between the quantum and classical reality as well as many complementary relativistic states (sub-universes) that conserve the total energy of the universe but have various spacetimes (clocks) maintaining relativity of spacetime. It is intriguing that the new physics also resolves many well-known paradoxes or quantum weirdness including the vacuum energy catastrophe, non-locality, and Heisenberg’s uncertainty, which is shown to be an artifact of the measurement problem (vindicating Einstein – “God doesn’t play dice”). A potential framework for an integrated universal model for matter-mind-consciousness is proposed entailing the observer and the observed. The new physics is then integrated also into a Relativistic Universe Expansion (RUE) model, Ref. [2 and 3], that is vindicated by recent observations of the universe expansion and resolves current paradoxes such as dark energy/matter, cosmological constant problem, CMB, black hole singularity, Hubble Tension, and massive galaxies observed in early universe etc. without considering time as a parameter.

Recently, Prof. Leonard Susskind of Stanford University compiled [4] a list of 20 unresolved paradoxes of physics/cosmology including the measurement problem. It is not just fortuitous that the proposed physics in Refs. [1,2, & 3], resolves almost all these foundational paradoxes.

[1] Singh, A., Resolving Collapse of Wavefunction and Quantum Foundational Paradoxes via Integrating New Physics of Particle Instability with Gravity, IJQF, 12 (2026) 1-22.

[2] Singh, A., Origin of Motion I. Spontaneous mass-energy equivalence model resolves current physics and cosmology paradoxes, Physics Essays 31,4 (2018).

[3] Singh, A., A Solution to Dark Energy, Cosmological Constant, Hubble Tension, and other Foundational Issues of Physics and Cosmology, publication in progress.

[4] Leonard Susskind, “What You’re Never Told About the Universe”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw4MhNHD5_c

Now in full disclosure, I was not there, but the idea that this might not have been the first big bang is intriguing. If I read correctly, the universe is expanding , but soon may slow and eventually reverse to a collapse. Lather, rinse repeat. Everything is preserved.

Some very deep and interesting ideas are presented in the above discussion. However, if it is acceptable to posit the existence of one very hot point the gave rise to our universe should it not be acceptable to posit the existence of very many, very small hot spots distributed over a much larger area. And then several questions might arise as to how these very many hot spots came into existence and what is their current states of existence. Unfortunately we are not able to use our very limited brains to discover this in the usual way of extrapolating from and combining past experiences. Rather, only a new model of mathematics, disconnected from our experiences will likely lead to an answer.

Yes, the quantum measurement problem collapses the original reality or wave function rendering all measurements and observations via routine scientific methods destructive or biased. The fundamental reality is absolute and eternal , but when an observer forces it to be seen thru 4 dimensions, distance, and time as well as mass appear as observed collapsed temporal realities. As Einstein said, time is only a stubborn illusion.

Observation will only get you so far. It creates dependencies on irrelevant factors. Like placing a buoy in the Aral desert, we are attempting to picture events before events could exist. Tautologies are rife. Everywhere is nowhere. Time’s alarm clock is going off, etc etc. One problem is the concept of a problem. Intelligence indicates the building blocks of our picture depend on diagrams that are a bit blocky. With arrows and whirly whizzy things that presuppose phenomena to calibrate dynamics. What’s exciting is we are here and trying to comprehend. But let’s not leap to any conclusions just yet. That would spoil the party. Knowledge gaps are the labs of the future.

Webb data show that cosmologists had the early evolution of galaxies all wrong. Considering that, I am not inclined to pay much attention to what they have to say about "before" the Big Bang.

I would like to comment on the earlier posting by John Menninga. The universe is eternal in its most fundamental state V=C. In this state, there is no arrow of time or entropy. However, in lower V<C complementary relativistic states there are clocks and arrows of time with increasing entropy. There is no synchronicity among various clocks and locations in space due to the relativistic nature of distance and time. Hence, there is no one fixed clock or universal time of beginning or ending or in between. Hence, Big Bang story is just a convenient and fascinating tale in an imaginary time that doesn’t exist. The observed universe including CMB features , creation of matter (particles, atoms to galaxies), Hubble and Supernova data, observed mature galaxies in the early universe etc all can be predicted via a relativistic universe without any notion of cosmic time, without dark energy, dark matter, Hubble Tension, super luminous inflation, and singularities by integrating the proper missing physics of the Cosmological Constant based on spontaneous decay of mass. This new physics also explains the inner workings of quantum mechanics resolving its paradoxes such as the measurement problem, quantum vacuum catastrophe, parallel universes, nonlocality etc etc. The paradoxes of modern cosmology are artifacts of the foundational issues of the standard LAMDA CDM MODEL such as violation of mass-energy conservation at the universe level, linear Hubble model vs nonlinear expansion shown by higher redshift observations that lead to incorrect extrapolations into the past evolution of the universe, as well as the presumptuous constancy of critical energy density of the universe etc etc.

For me, the universe is like a pan of boiling water. The rising bubbles are "big bangs", our known universe is just one of many, the pan is infinitely big and has been and will be on "the fire" always.

If we live here and now, there has been infinite time before us, there will be infinite time after us. There were, are, and will be infinite universes at any moment.

Discussion closed :-)

Ways of talking about the world we live in are not limited to scientific theory, or even hypothesis. Check out Sean Carroll's idea of Poetic Naturalism.

How does one define a useful way of talking? Useful to whom, for what purpose? Are there people to whom these speculations and conjectures about pre-big-bang cosmology are useful?

The article left one idea out. The Universe began when a horde of pink Easter Bunnies came scrambling out of a Cosmic Rabbit Hole. (They later transformed into quarks and gluons.)

What was on the other side of said Rabbit Hole? Science has queried and investigated the observable clues about it. It's 'the vacuum' and it's a place that is fundamentally paradoxical. It is the poster boy for 'Nothing' and as such it does not properly exist, by definition. This is a realm that ancient faith traditions have been probing long before Science got a name. 'The Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao'.

That's my way of telling the story, and I love reading these others being posted here. For me, our universe came from a very simple precursor germ universe, (I ask: what is the simplest functioning universe, and is the one we observe, our N = 1 data set, the simplest possible one, and if not, what explains the added complexity?) The simple Germ universe, perhaps a pure Potential Field such as Inflation, in turn emerged from fluctuations out of the ineffable primordial Vacuum with a capital V. The Vacuum is lawless, random, indifferent, etc., and it only came 'before' the Big Bang in the sense that it enabled time to emerge from the perspective of the entity or entities that began our universe. Probably quantum fluctuations.

I argue that accepting this Big-V Vacuum as primordial *on FAITH* is, by Occam's Razor, the least of all possible appeals to faith, and any 'world' with zero faith is a world without conscious minds.

First, lets be clear - none of these "theories" qualifies as a scientific theory, or even a hypothesis, lacking the rigorous testing required for theory status and even the testability required for hypothesis status. They remain - so far - conjectures.

That said ... the 'no boundaries' universe and the 'big bounce' and other cyclic universes (as well as all 'steady state' universes like the one proposed in this discussion by Avtar Singh) all ignore or try to sidestep entropy. Any universe that had no beginning would have wound down - converted all its useful energy to thermodynamic equilibrium - an eternity ago, and nothing would be happening now. In fact at ANY point in time thermodynamic equilibrium would have been reached an eternity earlier, and nothing would EVER happen.

The equations for Hartl & Hawking's 'no boundaries' universe rely on a mathematical concept called "imaginary time." The math works, but imaginary time has no useful application in physics.

Steinhardt & Turk's attempts to eliminate or sidestep entropy in their 'bouncing' universe are either unworkable (expanding branes may dilute entropy locally but cannot eliminate it or diminish it globally) or tautological (unknown "theoretical" 'null energy' violations as the cause of entropy violation.)

Boyle & Turok's 'mirror' universe simply sidesteps the origin question altogether. Whether time is running backward or forward, the point where the two meet is the beginning of both.

All THAT said ... I think we already know what came before - but the answer is repugnant to the mainstream Materialist Science community (although thanks to the efforts of Stephen C. Meyer, William Dembski, Hugh Ross, et al., it is gaining some traction.)

As Fred Hoyle put it - while still an atheist - “a commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature”

“Information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows.”

~ Anton Zeilinger, Nobel laureate quantum physicist.

“In the beginning was the word.”

~ The Gospel According to John, chapter 1, verse 1

Insisting on consistency across all scales of space and time leads to a unique answer (Time Now, New York: Rodin Books, 2025). As Lemaitre proposed (Nature, (1931) 127, 706), it began with one quantum. His notion of the quantum was confused. It was a quantum of space that replicated (a la quantum tunneling). It had Calabi-Yau geometry and Planck size.

Turns out this leads to simple explanations of all of fundamental physics' questions. For example, it supplies a natural physical foundation for cosmological inflation, both what got it going and what closed it down. Not to mention what dark energy and dark matter are (they too are manifestations of space quanta).

Noticed even less than Lemaitre, Riemann proposed granular space made of "space quanta" in his habilitation thesis (Nature, (1867) 8, 14) that set out the geometry Einstein used. And Einstein thought space must be discontinuous to his dying day.

This is a far simpler story than the standard model, which increasingly resembles a Rube Goldberg machine. In light of its simplicity and explanatory power, yes, we already have the answer to the question.

The Buddhists have a similar approach to the Big Bounce idea, nothing was

never the situation, there was always and end and a new beginning.

A lot of this depends on which brand of Buddhism one is following, but the idea

revolves around "mind" being infinite and arising and falling evolve from mind.

I must say the mirror universe idea sounds very much the same as the bouncing one. If the mirror universe is expanding along a negative time dimension, isn't that the same as it contracting towands the meeting point?

Big Bang never happened. It is an eternal block universe in a Cosmological Constant Field wherein the observed redshift is caused by the field while galaxies aren’t moving away or the universe is not expanding in time but space only. There is no beginning nor end to the universe. So the question doesn’t arise as to what caused the bang or what was there before it. Such a model predicts the Hubble and Supernova data as well as the observations of unpredicted mature galaxies in the far field universe without any notion of time and many well known paradoxes of cosmology. I am working on a paper describing this model.