More to the point: 'nothing' is not a scientifically well-defined term. It is useless to use it in the context of pre-Big Bang.

I agree, it is not a well defined term. Which also means that a state of nothingness may have some natural properties, some mathematical imperatives which are as yet unknown.

We are still faced with the question if the universe had a true beginning or if it is just an extension of a previously existing condition which had the potential for the BB.

But this question results in an infinite chain of prior causality, which just doesn't sound plausible.

Thus, if there was a beginning, there must have been a state of nothingness before that point and we end up with the question if nothing could have some unknown properties.

I believe we can ignore time and space as factors, so we and up with the assumption that a state of nothingness gave a spontaneous rise to

*something, *even if this something was an abstract potential.

The only thing I can think of which can exist in the abstract is in the form of a tensor, and in its simplest form a tensor requires a duality, a difference between two states.

Can

*nothing* be both simultaneously infinitely large and infinitely small?

If so, could that be considered a form of abstract tensor, a potential?