I will briefly attempt here to provide an alternative Big Bang scenario that properly caters for both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of phenomena.
In this scenario we always start from a present moment (which continually exists). Phenomenal notions in space time then obtain a merely relative meaning with respect to this absolute ineffable source (and end) of existence.
So before created phenomena come into being we have mere potential for existence. This can be represented in holistic mathematical terms as the total confusion of union (1) relating to quantitative notions of form with nothingness
(0) relating to corresponding qualitative notions of emptiness.
Earliest physical creations begins with duality (2) in both quantitative and qualitative terms. This quickly through a dynamic iteration process generates almost immediately all prime (and natural numbers).
If we could conceive of a world of merely of prime numbers then quantitative and qualitative aspects would remain identical. Put another way in a universe of merely prime numbers (as the most fundamental physical "objects") we would by definition have as many qualitative dimensions (as quantitative objects) in an ineffable manner. However the rapid combination of prime "objects" and "dimensions" quickly generates natural objects (which implicitly do have a phenomenal physical identity).
However this rapid generation of natural objects quickly leads to a collapse in corresponding dimensions (as matter achieves a more stable phenomenal form).
So the real issue in earliest creation is how the increasing identification of phenomenal objects necessarily leads to a dramatic loss in the unique dimensional qualities of these objects, thereby enabling them to attain an ever more common collective identity (i.e. with characteristics shared in common).
In the holistic mathematical sense in which I use dimension, remarkably what we term "science" as a rational means to investigate such evolution is by definition 1-dimensional.
Thus in the extreme desire to understand the nature of phenomenal objects we have reduced the dimensional qualitative aspect - literally - to an absolute minimum of 1. Therefore though conventionally we speak of a 4-dimensional physical world, we actually create significant asymmetry by treating the 3 spatial dimensions in a reduced quantitative manner.
What is remarkable is that if we now wish therefore to properly understand the nature of earliest creation (which existed in an unreduced multiple-dimensional framework) then we must psychologically experience reality in such higher dimensions.
Again using my holistic mathematical approach, I have demonstrated how nature through an advanced contemplative type intuitive vision actually corresponds to this higher dimensional perspective.
The clear implication is that to experience the beginning of creation we must experience from the end of creation i.e. through the psycho-spiritual attainment of pure spiritual union (which equally of course is an emptiness).
Thus in properly understanding the refined psychological dynamics prior to total union we would recreate in reverse complementary fashion the phenomenal structures of earliest creation.
What this demonstrates is that what we can know about physical reality ultimately is entirely mirrored by the psychological means by which we interpret this reality. Truly this reality and its appropriate interpretation are as mirrors to each other. So when they completely mirror each other there is no longer any separation but a union (that is also nothingness).
Finally, though I have been very critical of string theory there are marked similarities evident in the two approaches.
For example in both cases ultimately reality is seen in a mathematical fashion (though I would lay much greater emphasis in holistic mathematical interpretation in this regard).
Also both approaches see early creation as entailing a much higher number of dimensions (which become subsequently reduced with the existence of stable phenomena).
However again - unlike conventional string theory, I would draw a strong distinction as between both quantitative and qualitative interpretation. Indeed as I have written elsewhere the key notions of string theory can be given an alternative "imaginary" interpretation (in qualitative terms).