I've heard Stephen Hawking and many other physicists voice their opinions on the issue of what was or what the conditions were before the big bang. Stephen Hawking says: "As far as we are concerned, events before the big bang can have no consequences and so should not form part of a scientific model of the universe. We should therefore cut them out of the model and say that the big bang was the beginning of time. This means that questions such as who set up the conditions for the big bang are not questions that science addresses." I understand what he is saying here, and I'm sure many of you share the same idea. I do as well, to an extent. However, I do have a criticism of Hawking for this statement. I'm unconvinced that pre-big bang questions should simply be pushed to the side. To claim that events before the big bang can have no consequences seems to forget that the big bang itself must have been a consequence of an event or some kind of "setup" before it. Perhaps this is due to my lack of knowledge as a whole about cosmology. I'm just curious who else on this board agrees that events before the big bang (whatever that may mean) isn't something that should just be pushed to the side. I hope that if this is something I shouldn't be concerned about, someone here can help me correct the error in my thinking.