Hi!

Common sense reasoning is a human construct based on our observations of the rules governing the Universe.

If those rules are what logic and reason are based and dependent on, then common sense cannot be applied to the origins of the Universe and the "time" before its emergence. Prior to the Universe existing, there was no Universe for the rules to exist in, and hence no basis for the validity of reason as we know it.

To reiterate, it is invalid to apply logic (contingent on the existence of the Universe and the forces within it) to explain the existence and workings of areas external to the Universe and its governing forces.

For example:
While it follows that in our Universe existence cannot emerge from nonexistence (as matter and energy can only be transformed, but not created or destroyed), this is only true under specific conditions and doesn't necessarily apply to areas where the conditions are different/nonexistent.

Therefore, the period "before" the Big Bang (and so before the existence of time, matter, and the rules governing them) is most likely not subject to logic: it is possible that existence can emerge from nonexistence outside the area bound by the laws of the Universe.

​

Is the above valid? If so, why isn't it more popular in mainstream science, i.e. as a rebuttal to the Cosmological Argument? I've never seen anyone postulate that.

I will be very grateful for any responses.