I'm not as well read on big bang theory as some of you, but I have spent a lot of time wondering about some of the comments used to describe it in the media or education. A lot of them describe it as being a single, immeasurably small, finite point and being composed of pure energy. String theory then says maybe it's not immeasurably small and we have a dimension (or more) in this nothingness. As the universe expands, energy condenses into mass - particles, nuclei, atoms, molecules, planets... But for this to happen, one would have to assume that either the energy began expanding in a none uniform manner, or it expanded into a none uniform space. It's easy to look at things like Brownian motion now and say random, but it obviously isn't, it obeys very basic rules and it's scale is what makes the results hard to predict. Those initial collisions that produced the condensation of energy can only have occurred if none uniform patches emerged as it expanded. Supposing the energy emitted from this singularity moves out in the fashion of a Maxwell Boltzman curve, I can see how that may be possible, with a spectrum of energies being emitted from the point you have variation. Or this finite point was not perfectly uniform to begin with perhaps. I can fully appreciate how a minute variation at the big bang could snowball into a star system. But that variation has to exist for that to happen - you can't snowball something without rolling a smaller snowball first. I find it believable that the universe has been expanding and collapsing for quite a while and that it does not fully collapse, it merely does so to a point that it becomes unstable enough that it re-expands in a perfectly lossless fashion. Although, that does not do much to answer the origination of variance problem. I was thinking about this while I was also thinking about evolution, that an ability to reproduce does nothing without a factor of variation. Genetic evolution plays the idea out for what would normally be thought of as life, but I thought it was interesting to apply it to a more universal concept. An ability to expand a gigantic amount of energy alone does not explain the variation - the universe should be a homogenous, lower energy clone of the singularity if this variation wasn't there at the start. I found it interesting to consider this in regards to biology, that students are told variation is random and later that maybe some elements effect this, so it's not entirely random. But I began wondering how far back you could pull the causes of what is now considered random - in terms of our DNA and our own perceptions, which are based on the physical world. We understand so many of the laws governing interactions, what is beyond is us is the observational and computational ability to sequence them all together to explain why a particular DNA strand mutated - but ultimately, it's a certainty from a long, long, long way back. There are, as I understand the universe, absolutely no entirely random events - which conversely means everything is predictable. This got a bit close to a religious experience in thinking, so I simply kept wondering, so where has this uniqueness originated from, is there one or more scientific explanations for the source of it. The most rooted I can get this question is, why did the big bang expand in a none uniform manner?