[Thinklots (OP)]

I’m seeking clarification about the definition of the word universe. Do you agree that, “Universe” encompasses all there is, and therefore the universe could be any one of many possible scenarios, i.e., do you agree that there is one universe, regardless of the various possible characteristics it might have?

According to most cosmologists if we play the movie backwards, our universe shrinks into a single point of extreme density and energy. I see your point that perhaps this singularity existed in what was already "the universe". My belief has been that the Big Bang caused our universe to come into being. But I am understanding that you are proposing that the Big Bang only populated an already existing universe. Do I understand you correctly?
This would certainly fit my hypothesis because what better prerequisite can the Big Bang have than an already existing universe with the laws already intact?

Infinite space could be hosting an ongoing and perpetual process.

Absolutely. I have listened to astrophisicists saying that time and the fabric of space began at the time of the Big Bang so many times that I accepted it without considering other possibilities. Thank you for sharing a very feasable one.

[Bogie_smiles]

According to most cosmologists if we play the movie backwards, our universe shrinks into a single point of extreme density and energy. I see your point that perhaps this singularity existed in what was already "the universe". My belief has been that the Big Bang caused our universe to come into being. But I am understanding that you are proposing that the Big Bang only populated an already existing universe. Do I understand you correctly?

That idea appeals to my sensitivities, .

This would certainly fit my hypothesis because what better prerequisite can the Big Bang have than an already existing universe with the laws already intact?

Absolutely. I have listened to astrophisicists saying that time and the fabric of space began at the time of the Big Bang so many times that I accepted it without considering other possibilities. Thank you for sharing a very feasable one.

My pleasure. Hopefully your thread will proceed with much interesting discussion.

The premise that the reality of the universe and the natural laws that govern it can be any of an endless list of scenarios is a daunting fact, but the universe is as it is, and could be no other way, meaning that my thinking is that only one universal scenario has always been in effect. That speaks of a sameness that has and is and always will be governed by what I speculate are a set of invariant natural laws.

Thanks for listening and keeping an open mind.

[Colin2B]

Moving my post was kinda uncool Colin2B.  .........we are having a discussion about Cosmology... that belongs where I originally posted it.

Well, I thought it was rather cool 

It’s more about how this forum is organised. This is primarily an educational site so the section you posted in is for questions about established ideas. Cosmology can be discussed here and you have a much wider freedom in what you can discuss. Also as as you pointed out this is your own theory you are primarily discussing:
“I truly was not looking for a debate. And it is far more productive to a discussion to post your own personal belief and support it - rather than to simply discredit other persons offerings.”

I think you will find a much wider discussion here, in fact it already looks as though it is.

[Thinklots (OP)]

"The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there," Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told Phys.org.
Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B that the Big Bang singularity can be resolved by their new model in which the universe has no beginning and no end.
Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html#jCp [nofollow]

A scientific paper was written by Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology and is under peer review. This paper is the origin of my original thoughts that were intrucuced in my initial post. My understanding of the material led me to the conclusion that there are required prerequisites for our universe to exist as we observe it today.

[Bogie_smiles]

"The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there," Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told Phys.org.
Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B that the Big Bang singularity can be resolved by their new model in which the universe has no beginning and no end.
Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html#jCp

A scientific paper was written by Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology and is under peer review. This paper is the origin of my original thoughts that were intrucuced in my initial post. My understanding of the material led me to the conclusion that there are required prerequisites for our universe to exist as we observe it today.

The link does have a catchy headline:
"No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning"
February 9, 2015 by Lisa Zyga, Phys.org


However, there can be a distinction drawn between the beginning of the entire universe and no beginning, that still invokes big bang type events. A universe that has always existed could feature big bang type of events here and there, now and then, across a potentially infinite and eternal landscape. Big bangs would be caused by a perpetual process of action where each new big bang has the preconditions of parent arenas expanding, overlapping, contributing galactic content to a big crunch that forms in the overlap space, and collapse/bangs under the compression of gravity. It would be a perpetual process that defeats entropy by recycling old cold matter into hot dense balls of energy that expand, decay into particles, form galaxies, and become parent arenas in their own right. Any comment on that being a universe that always existed, had no beginning, but features big bangs at the start of each new big bang arena?

[Thinklots (OP)]

Any comment on that being a universe that always existed, had no beginning, but features big bangs at the start of each new big bang arena?

Yes Bogie_smiles, this would be an example of a Big Bang prerequisite that replaces the premise that there was no universe, no fabric of space time, and the Big Bang brought everything into existence. My prerequisite hypothesis is directed at abolishing the belief that out of nothing a singularity appeared and exploded into the Big Bang, bringing our universe into existence. Something had to already exist that provided the ability for a singularity to form, and I would go a step farther to say that the natural laws already were in place. The Big Bang itself is a unique type of event in the arena of supernovae and black holes colliding - thus special laws apply to these events that need to be added to the known laws of physics.
As posted now by multiple contributors, a pre-existing universe offers the best prerequisite for the Big Bang. That would make string theory, quantum mechanics, and mathmatics already exist and would be harmonious with my original post.