Excuse my simple mindedness about the question but which of these has more evidence for being true? Either there was absolutely nothing and then something, or there was always something. It doesn't matter how many layers you strip back, how many big bangs, no matter how powerful our measuring tools are, the answer to the universe must be one of those two things. For this question when I refer to universe I mean everything that can possibly exist in any and all space-times, universes, virtual spaces ect ect... everything. So regardless of whatever theory turns out to be true, the answer must be that either there was absolutely nothing and then something or there was always something... Which one has more scientific backing?