Contingency

[Arkilogue]

You think?  From, nothing nothing comes, though.,.I thought?  

We attempt to explain the unknown by reference to the known.  To do otherwise is simply to assert and reassert.  

Unfortunately you can't get a -rational- idea from an infinite regress, or any reference to non-terminus (reason requires terminus to generate conclusions).  Doesn't mean it isn't true, just that we don't have any means of determining it to be so.  What was the pre-existing substance contigent upon..if it wasn't contigent upon something than there's no reason to think the the universe as it is was either..or more accurately, to do so would be an inconsistent application of reason.  

Not currently, we can't.  All of the data within the bubble appears to be limited, fundamentally, to "post bubble" conditions.  Without knowledge of what the conditions were before this there's no reason to assume that the data post-bubble is meaningful with regards to anything pre-bubble, or even that reason holds pre-bubble....for that matter....and all of this assumes that there was a pre-bubble..that there was time-before-time.

 It's a black box, at present.

Depends on what you make of it.

I do too.

It's not an infinite regress, it's an eternal state. Non-relative time (no space of movement for orbit of anything). The prexisting substance is the necessary being.

Really? I thought the general scientific consensus was that all the forces, fields, and substance that we enjoy as individual operations/forms were inherent in the unified state (singularity) prior to inflation. They did not appear willy nilly.

Well then you are going to have to think outside the box...in fact you'll probably have to dance on a tesseract.