Plagerism is the Sincerest Form of Explanation (The Beginning of Everything)

Scientists work by setting up 'models' of how the real world might be then test each model by using it to make predictions of things that we ought to see - or measurements that we ought to be able to make if the 'model' were correct. In the middle of the 20th century there were two competing models of how the universe came into being, one was called the "steady state" model and one was called "the big bang" model. The steady state model was very elegant, but eventually turned out to be wrong, that is, predictions based on it were shown to be false. According to the steady state model, there never was a beginning; the universe had always existed in pretty much its present form (I actually preferred this model). The big bang model on the other hand suggested that the universe began at a definite moment in time in a strange explosion. The predictions made using the the big bang model as their basis keep turning out to be right and so it has now been generally accepted by most scientists as the most right model.

According to the modern version of the big bang model the entire observable universe expanded into existence between 13 and 14 billion years ago. Why do they say 'observable'? The 'observable universe' means everything for which we have any evidence of at all. It is possible that there are other universes that are inaccessible to all our senses and instruments. Some scientists speculate, perhaps fancifully, that there may be a 'multiverse'; a bubbling foam of universes of which our universe is only one 'bubble'. Or it may be that the observable universe, the one we live in, is the only universe there is. Either way, the observable universe seems to have begun in the big bang just under 14,000,000,000 years ago.

Some scientists believe time itself began in the big bang and we should no more ask what happened  before the big bang than we should ask what is north of the North Pole. If you don't understand that...you're not alone, neither do I. I don't know if it is because I consider myself a scientist, but I do sort of understand the evidence that shows that the big bang happened and when.

To me, what I find unbelievable and disappointing about all of the origin myths of all of the religions that have ever existised is that they begin by assuming the existence of some kind of living creature before the universe itself came into being; Bumba (Boshongo tribe of the Congo) or Brahma (India) or Pan Gu (China) or Yahweh (Jewish) or Unkulukulu (Zulu) or Abassie (Nigeria) or 'Old Man in the Sky' (Salish, a tribe of native Americans from Canada). Wouldn't you think that a universe of some kind would have to come first to provide a place for the creative spirit to go to work in? None of the myths ever give any explanation for how the creator of the universe himself (and it is USUALLY a 'he') came into existence.

We as humans will probably never know with 100% certainty how the universe and reality came into existence, and that is totally cool. I'm ok with that, it doesn't scare me or make me worried and I'm raising my girls with the same attitude. It's ok not knowing, life is still AMAZING and should be experienced in a compassionate and respectful way but it doesn't need "a reason", being here is reason enough.