[nilak (OP)]

Here is an idea I want to present, about what happened after the Big Bang.
The hypothesis I think makes more sense says that time and space existed at the moment of BB and something before that doesn’t make sense since there’s no time to back to. You want to know what’s going on at a time before the BB but if the universe begins to exist at the moment zero that time before moment z cannot exist. So the beginning doesn’t need a prior cause. Of course it’s a hypothesis, and It may be wrong but it makes some sense. Now the idea that I want to bring is that time may have went into two directions from the BB on. It follows then that the past is created and it’s also 14.7 b years in the other direction of time. The particles created in the reverse running time are mostly antiparticles as seen from our perspective but they would seem normal as seen from observers made of antimatter that went backwards. Occasionally we can detect antimatter as simple new strands originated from our perspective.
I also have another idea about time reversibility. In the delayed choice quantum erased experiment some may conclude that the past can be changed based on what happens in the present. For example you could write down on paper an x=5 for a detection corresponding for a lump pattern then after say 10 minutes (we imagine  a 10min delay path) you detect x=7 that corresponds  to an interference pattern. You look down on the page you have written but  you see 7 not 5 and basically you would remember 7 and not realize the past has changed in your mind as well. You can’t tell from the fist measurement which is for lump and which for interference but after like 100 trials you will be able to distinguish them.

[Halc]

Here is an idea I want to present, about what happened after the Big Bang.
The hypothesis I think makes more sense says that time and space existed at the moment of BB and something before that doesn’t make sense since there’s no time to back to. You want to know what’s going on at a time before the BB but if the universe begins to exist at the moment zero that time before moment z cannot exist.

This isn't too far off. Instead of space and time, there is only spacetime since they're one thing. There are few that hold to a view that the universe is something that took place in time.

The analogy is the fact that my house is held up by the dirt under it, and that dirt by the rock under that, etc.  Each layer needs something further down to support it, and hence the old theory of Earth held up by a turtle, and only the top turtle at that. Most people seem able to accept a spherical Earth where the house is effectively held up by the middle which doesn't really have a clearly defined 'up' and is not in need of being held up itself. You can only dig a hole so deep and there no more down to go.  No need for the turtles.
The same people seem to have a difficultly accepting something similar for the big bang. Each moment is caused (held up by) prior moments, so they must posit something analogous to the turtle to cause the BB, thus putting time outside the universe just like the turtles put 'down' outside the Earth instead of Earth defining its own 'down'.

That said, there is no lack of real theory about physics outside the boundary of our own little bubble of spacetime.  There is still something that might be analogous to 'time' out there, but it doesn't necessarily have a direction or just 1 dimension, so talking about 'before' is less correct than talking about 'outside'.  Typically the word 'universe' refers to our (entire) bubble of spacetime, so this is not part of that kind of universe. For some light reading, look up eternal inflation theory.

So the beginning doesn’t need a prior cause.

Nor does it make sense to call the 'cause' a prior one if there is such a relation. So I agree. One can simply talk about an initial condition if you want.

Of course it’s a hypothesis, and It may be wrong but it makes some sense. Now the idea that I want to bring is that time may have went into two directions from the BB on.

Back to the Earth analogy, you can go in any number of directions from the center of Earth, but all of them are 'up', so not sure how different those directions are.

It follows then that the past is created and it’s also 14.7 b years in the other direction of time.

More like 13.7, and your wording suggests that spacetime has an age, which it dooesn't.  We occupy a region of it 13.7 BY from the BB, but that doesn't mean that the other parts of spacetime don't exist.  Any anti-universe such as you are describing similarly doesn't have an age. To suggest it does is to suggest just separate space existing within time, and then we're back to the universe as something that 'happened' in time and needs a real cause.

The particles created in the reverse running time are mostly antiparticles as seen from our perspective but they would seem normal as seen from observers made of antimatter that went backwards. Occasionally we can detect antimatter as simple new strands originated from our perspective.

OK.

I also have another idea about time reversibility. In the delayed choice quantum erased experiment some may conclude that the past can be changed based on what happens in the present.

Yes. Only non-local interpretations of QM suggest anything like that.

For example you could write down on paper an x=5 for a detection corresponding for a lump pattern then after say 10 minutes (we imagine  a 10min delay path) you detect x=7 that corresponds  to an interference pattern. You look down on the page you have written but  you see 7 not 5 and basically you would remember 7 and not realize the past has changed in your mind as well.

Doesn't work like that. If you wrote down x=5, that can't be changed. It's a measured thing. The delayed choice experiments can be interpreted as modification of facts in the past that have yet to be measured, but none is able to modify a measured thing. If it changes your memory, then there is no empirical evidence that x=5 was ever written.

[nilak (OP)]

More like 13.7, and your wording suggests that spacetime has an age, which it dooesn't.  We occupy a region of it 13.7 BY from the BB, but that doesn't mean that the other parts of spacetime don't exist.  Any anti-universe such as you are describing similarly doesn't have an age. To suggest it does is to suggest just separate space existing within time, and then we're back to the universe as something that 'happened' in time and needs a real cause.

The way I imagined it is with the present and past existing at the same time but the future doesn’t. Then it follows that spacetime gets larger. 2d + time representation where spacetime from the BB looks  like a cone turns now turns to a double cone. So you could  go back in principle before BB into the other direction. From our perspective (made of matter)  we would see antimatter going back in time and creating the past. However, this seems  confusing because at the moment of big bang there was no past no future except for the extremely small spacetime that we are uncertain about what it was. But now if we could go back in principle before BB we would see something. With regard to the QM part the past may also change so that would mean an extradimension of time where the changes are made. I’m not sure about that, it’s just an idea. Also since the past can change , according to this idea, you couldn’t notice that measured things may change so it would be difficult to get empirical evidence as you said

[Halc]

You need to find yourself a philosophy forum.  All your topics are philosophical, not scientific.

The way I imagined it is with the present and past existing at the same time but the future doesn’t.

That makes your view 'growing block', which is a form of presentism since it posits a distinction between past, present, and future. It is a denial of Einstein's relativity of simultaneity since under a presentist view, and event in the past can be simultaneous with an event in the future relative to any frame other than the absolute one.

You're on your own defending that, but you've no shortage of people on the same side.

However, this seems  confusing because at the moment of big bang there was no past no future

Ah, but under the growing block view, there is a 'past' to the BB since time is separate from space. There was a time when all of what you call spacetime was in the future and nothing had yet banged.  The universe had to get going from a prior state of not being there.  The block view (the one with no present) doesn't have that problem since time is intrinsic to the structure, not external to it.  The structure doesn't 'grow'.  All moments in time are open to being observed, not just 'the present'.

[puppypower]

If you plug in the speed of light; c, into the Special Relativity; SR equations. time, distance and mass all become discontinuous. We know that mass cannot travel or exist at the speed of light. 

Mass is easy to see, since mass is a thing and not just a reference variable like time and space. Reference variable are more arbitrarily defined by humans. However, it would be reasonable to conclude that time and distance and even space-time, like mass, will not exist at the c reference. This is predicted by SR.

This conclusion appears evident in the assumption of the primordial atom or the original singularity of the BB. Being a singularity, is an artifact of being slightly outside the c reference. Since inertial cannot move at the speed of light, the inertial singularity becomes bound in space, time and mass to a point. It cannot go beyond that, or it will overlap the c reference, where it cannot go and still remain inertial. It is a seed for space-time confined by the c-reference.

At the speed of light reference, space-time becomes discontinuous causing space-time to dissociate into separated space and time. Beyond the singularity, one can move in space without the constant of time and move in time without the constraint of space.

One expression of this is a quantum jump of an electron between energy levels. It can move forward in space, between levels, in zero time, since it is not attached to space by the inertial limits of the speed of light and space-time. The quantum world is partially connected to the c-reference. Quantum saves time potential, so it can be used elsewhere; force and accelerations.

In the c-reference. since space and time can act independently, the c-reference is a place of infinite entropy, since all entropy states, become possible when space and time are not joined at the hips. To form the primordial atom, we need to lower entropy at a point in space-time. This will release some of the energy that was previously tied up as infinite entropy.

The primordial atom has its singularity limits and energy, while also being under the 2nd law.  induced by the c-reference. It now needs to increase entropy; more complex states, and in doing so return the energy back to the c-reference. This is reflected by gravity which causes mass density to increase and space-time to approach the singularity again; black hole reference close to the c-refernece.

[nilak (OP)]

The reason for the growing block is that in physics there no evidence for infinities but if you assume the future and past exist at same time and infinities don’t then the only way is to say that time also has an end at some point. With the growing model time is never an infinite quantity. But it implies a relativistic spacetime existing within an absolute time for which there is no evidence.
Also at the time of Big Bang if matter went forward and antimatter backwards then if go back before BB, we find antimatter then suddenly at the moment of BB, all turns to matter, but that’s not how Feinmann diagrams work. Normal you would have matter-antimatter annihilation not antimatter turning into matter. 

[Bored chemist]

at the c reference.

You keep  hijacking threads with this idea, but you refuse to say what it means.