There Was No Big Bang SIngularity

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/07/27/there-was-no-big-bang-singularity/#6990e40b7d81

Good article, making that rather important point that is often forgotten. I must remember it when the issue comes up! 

Amazing that inflation is 40 years old. I remember it when it was quite new.

Come on you two.  Here is the last line and sum of the article. "Everything else? It's nothing more than speculation."  The article DID NOT state a single thing except that singularities do not exist.  One does not need a universe in a point.  Anything in a point does has the same effect.  And that's why the first thing was a particle with volume, one, with the total energy already in it, and no motion.  It was PLACE there from a change of modes of energy.  See , one does not need an article, to be a PhD or even be known.  And please let me know how I am wrong,  I love seeing your  logic too.   I hope you do see the difference between stating nothing and stating how it was

The main point was that since the inflation hypothesis has been accepted as a key part of the standard cosmology, there is not even a dubious reason to believe in a Big Bang singularity. Extrapolation back in time no longer leads to such a thing. Neither does it lead to a primordial particle, so until your hypothesis makes better predictions it cannot be jusified.

You're free to think and share whatever you want.  In my model a singularity is equivalent to all of space.  But in that space, if a being were to try to figure out where it came from, it wouldn't be a point but what we have here.

Ok   Elroch;  You say, "Extrapolation back in time no longer leads to such a thing. Neither does it lead to a primordial particle,"  SO tell us what does it lead too ????

It leads to the inflationary epoch. I think it is fair to say that nothing earlier can be inferred (except that the inflationary epoch lasted long enough to smooth out the Universe, which is scarcely any time at all).

I can see that you and I can not understand one word the other said.   I assume there was nothing, next there was something.  I call that a first particle.  See if you can either understand that or add what you think.  Are you saying, there is no way to understand anything at this time ?

why assume there was nothing?  I cannot imagine "nothing"

What we have here is a failure to communicate!   

You are right ponz11.  I should never have used the word "Nothing".   Nothing  is described in the forums I wrote earlier and are too long for here.  That place is called Zu and the first particle is called Eu.  Please go read those forums first.  Thanks.