No boundary theories are rather weak though. They're interesting
   intellectual brain candy but as far as evidence goes, currently
   quite fictional. A first-cause M-Brane or first-cause God or
   first-cause singularity of any kind whatsoever is far more
   plausible at present than no-boundary theories. == Thank you.
   *whew* When you said "no-boundary" I went, "oh no... no no...."
   ok, I'll let that one go since we seem to be on the same page
   there smile emoticon == I'm agnostic at present but when I _was_
   religious, I took a 5 year side-trip into Eastern Orthodoxy
   (Christianity) and their explanations of "essense vs energies"
   and the theology of the nature of Uncreated quite robust. So the
   "Who came before God?" stuff makes me chuckle because it kinda
   misses it completely by placing Time as primary, as if God is a
   mad scientist sitting outside of the spacetime continuum having
   a little fun, which is rather a silly view of God. I'm not a
   believer but, childish theology is still childish smile emoticon
   == No-boundary is definitely appealing in many ways. Of course
   there's always the danger of a beautiful theory being
   beautifully wrong. Witness: "The Universe is Mathematics" guy.
   He leaves me shaking my head but even moreso the people who
   cheer it on. == here's an example of ex nihlo that I was exposed
   to when I was with them. [I almost became a monk - I was really
   into this stuff at the time] via an search for "eastern orthodox
   ex nihilo" --- As St. Gregory of Nyssa affirms, "It begins to
   be, and the very substance of the creation owes its beginning to
   change". --- In short. Change itself is the thing, rather than a
   "once was/now is" == We're a product of our cultures, Jorn.
   That's why it doesn't make sense to you. What would a change
   without an object and without time be like? it's like that. Of
   course it's definitely platonism in spirit. [and I don't mean
   ghost -- even to say "in spirit" invokes idealism as well, as if
   ah idea can be animated from within.. but whatever, that's
   splitting metaphorical hairs] == I wouldn't be surprised if the
   Universe is eternal. Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if
   there was first-cause. I think it's why I end up restricting
   most of my energies in this area to starting with the primal
   star going supernova/crashing into giant molecular gas
   cloud/forming all the elements that make us up, collected by
   static electricity then by gravity... etc etc. 'cause that
   leaves the other stuff open for other people to debate heavily,
   but at least *I* know where I came from. Thank you Primal Star
   for blowing up grin emoticon [I can easily substitute: Thank you
   God for blowing up the Primal Star" or "Thank You systems and
   processes that began long ago for blowing up the Primal Star".
   Doesn't matter to me really. ==