[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by Nobody "The inflation, only, theory makes no sense coming from nothing. The laws of physics require an infinite, eternal existence of energy/matter___IMO, it's just the original forces of motion and their evolutionary organizations that matter." I can appreciate that, Lloyd, but if you are referring to quantized energy/matter, there would be no need for a big bang or explosion; and if not quantized, there would be no room for any motion at all of any kind.

What quantized the initial energy/matter? I see only thermo-hydro-dynamics as the prime mover of all universal motion and actions. If no big-bang, what quantized energy/matter?

Yet, even mainstream interpretations imply space-time is required for the laws of particle physics to function, and that at a certain point space-time doesn't exist.

What does space-time do? It never changes, or if it changes, no observer is possible, so we'd never know it. It's the Einstein illusion. Space and time are separate absolutes. Some say motion creates time, maybe true, but time still exists, all by it's lonesome, as the descriptor of infinite eternal energy/matter, before first star, before any possible sight of energy/matter's motion.

I might be reading you all wrong, but I see light at infinite speed as being equal to zero, and that light creates matter and antimatter; and matter and antimatter creates light/energy. Which can arise from nothing because nothing is the same as a unified 1 and negative 1 - matter and antimatter - which is the state where all four forces merge at non-dimensional points.

It doesn't matter what speed light exists at, it's still the speed of light, and nothing changes. Light speed is absolute, no matter what speed. It is not zero, it is itself___always. As to "light creates matter and antimatter", what creates light is the proper question___what existed before first star light? As to "nothing," tis impossible, if we are going to have a logical universe functioning by the laws of physics, and it certainly does. The conservation laws of energy and matter require it to be infinite and eternal equilibriums of only different organizations of motions, also seen as finite matter. U should read Poincare, he stated your ending statement much better, i.e., "A singularity is required to exhibit paradoxes." However, the absolute known laws of physics prevent such nonsense.

regards