"In modern physics, the phenomenon of gravitation is most accurately described by the "general theory of relativity" by Einstein, in which the phenomenon itself is a consequence of the curvature of spacetime governing the motion of inertial objects."  Here is a source from an article l  that I found online to support this unknowingly force to attempt to write this discussion that I have absolutely no educational background in, unless you want to say a dream at the age of 3 years old in a gravity tank with her immediate family counts as an astrophysics prerequisite; highly doubtable. The phys.org news blog was the closest thing  found to remotely give this idea here any worth looking more into this possibly misinformed theory of the "big  bang" and perhaps they are very similar but there is a big difference. The billion dollar question now is what makes the difference? Could it be… gravity+dark matter+ elementary particles+neutrons+aether+hydrogen=cosmogony? Does gravity need another case study to see if it adds up to what it is defined as today? There is this intuition force that holds up a flashing neon sign with an arrow signifying to look more into ether and gravity or maybe they are the same thing? 

Why do I object the big bang theory? Maybe it is because there are too many gapping grey areas that could use some filling. 

In the middle of no where through the pitch black, the obscure faceless One stood objectively. An undisclosed phenomena objected out from the nonexistence into a complexation of secularization of singularity. Deeply-seated in an abundance of forty winks, a cockayne condition occurs and absorbs into a materialized opaque reflecting in its own environment the punctuality of "black body density distribution" ( Planks Law). This is the great inhalation; holding inspiration; fire∴

Laborious chemicals of radiation from various chemical compounds (if that makes sense)increases in temperature, in physics this is known as the "law of total radiation" (R=CT⁴) which is particularly true to the "black body theory".i.e. this may be in relation to Einsteins theory of "special relativity E=MC2".  Unfortunately, the calorimetry is unknown because it's not acknowledged to the precise variables that are in dense. On that account, the expansion of gases with heat are greater then liquid or solid expansions (maybe that can sheds some light of truth in a dark and untouchable place). For all one knows, this concoction of heat produces a pulsation of wave motion with a vibratory affect; reflecting a heart beat. Could this be the first motion known in the cosmos? Maybe not if the cosmos are not yet created! Perhaps physics can explain the possibility that sensitive flames are being generated here under the conditions of gases. In some cases, gases are sensitive to the vibrations from the vibratory frictions which develop flames; however, not created from sound waves. Here is a possibility of a fiery void of nothing slowly evolving into a materialized matter of sorts. 

Now there is a chaotic mixture of variables (unknown) inside a non-materialized matter per se that binds the variables together. Thus creating a pressure that is constant without any release valves. As variables come into contact with one another they are creating a friction that maybe erodes the substance that holds the void as a whole. Think of this void like a helium balloon. If we constantly add more helium pressure to the balloon (yes, it is sounding like the "big bang") it is eventually going to diffuse all the variables inside will thus expand creating an action/motion in the same matter as an explosion, but not an explosion at all scientist say. This is the great exhalation of breath; life force.  Now we have space! Maybe an isotropic radiator can explain why there is no explosion as if there was one here on Earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotropic_radiator

Objects have appeared in an organic form derived from the exact environment they came from. Now glittering lampyridae are scattered throughout the dark mother-universe. Everything that was once contained as one has been blown out into a separation of a whole. A duration that will only be an estimation of perception from a semantic imaginary evaluation from a sense-experience. No one sees a spermatozoon enter the egg at conception the same applies to this prodigious mundane world.  

From the invisible to visible; nonmaterial to material; non-physical to physical; non-living to living organisms or maybe there was always something there that was alive, but what is it?