> Yes we do: https://www.britannica.com/science/space-time https://www.britannica.com/science/space-time We have an accepted standard model. 2 in fact. QM and

> Yes we do: https://www.britannica.com/science/space-time https://www.britannica.com/science/space-time We have an accepted standard model. 2 in fact. QM and Lambda CDM say very little about how things were working very close the t=0, and say absolutely nothing about how the conditions were a t=0 or "before". As I said in my comment, people suggest ideas of how things could be. But nothing tangible, nothing ever included in ΛCDM, nothing predicted by QM… we are missing data, solid math, and solid physic to postulate anything about t<=0. I mean … we don't even know how gravity works in these conditions. How could we even say anything about time! > Q.E.D. I would classify your previous comment as pseudo science, and saying "it's difficult for most people to grasp" as lack of humility. If you do understand how space and time were structured "before the existence of our universe", you should go claim a Nobel price.