>>9560910when we say time didn't exist before the big bang it may be misleading to some. As far as we know, time may not have been flowing - but this doesn't mean what you think - it's a bit simpler. Have you ever heard of Einstein?
He had a theory of relativity. Essentially all you need to understand of this, is that the fabric of the universe is tied to the floor of time. You should already know from Isaac Newton that mass can directly affect other mass by interaction across space (gravity). Einstein saw this connection between time and space, and realized that gravity must also affect time. His theory states that the closer you get to mass, the more the continuum of space-time is warped, and the slower time moves for you.
Now imagine an extreme case - a black hole. Imagine orbiting near a black hole - safely, and coming out to see the rest of the universe had aged at a much faster rate. now imagine orbiting a larger black hole. time would move even slower for you. But the black hole can always be larger right? Well we aren't sure how large they can get, but if like you to imagine if all the mass in the entire universe was jammed into one singularity. If we say there is infinite mass in the universe, then time could not have been flowing, and therefore could not have existed. If we claim time existed before the big bang, then the universe must not be off infinite mass.
So, to hopefully clear up your confusion, you cannot say either of these statements for sure. They are mutually exclusive. Either the universe has infinite mass, or time existed and flowed before the creation of the universe as we know it. It may be quite a while before we know the truth - but most modern day scientists seem to believe the universe is of infinite mass.
