>>13625435Furthermore, the only reason you insist upon this is because you assume the beginning of the universe must be something that follows your intuition. This is also a mistake.
You are just a fucking primate evolved to see patterns in things. The universe has no obligation to do things in intuitive ways to you. This has led to much discussion about literally any result in physics in the last 100 years, because we keep insisting that physical phenomena must be intuitive to our sense of logic and whatnot. Experimental results show they don't need to be.
So say the universe existing for an infinitely long time in an unchanging way, until it changes randomly at some point, might not be intuitive to you. But that doesn't matter. Your intuition literally doesn't matter a single fucking bit when it comes to explaining the inner workings of the most complex physical phenomena. I'm pretty sure you aren't even up to date with physical literature. There's plenty of observable phenomena right now that would likely pose "logical troubles" to you (quantum zeno effect, casimir effect, etc).
In fact I could, by your very words, claim the Casimir effect is proof that something can come out of nothing. The casimir effect is observable in laboratory. Things can experience attraction forces in the absence of any of the fundamental interactions, just because of random fluctuations in the vacuum (what we best understand to be "nothing" at this point).
You are not special, neither is your intuition, and nature doesn't owe you anything.
What physics can best tell us right now is that before a certain moment (planck epoch) it is impossible for our current physical laws to say what happened. That it was likely a singularity, and that that was likely the beginning of the universe. The fact that physics can't claim anything beyond that means that humans can't safely claim anything beyond that in general, and that includes you.