Originally Posted by 1Hit1der View Post
The contemporary view is that the universe, itself, thus springs back, and forth, of nothingness, and, so, continues to be created, and destroyed.
I referred to the notion of quantum entanglement, by which creation, and, hence, it's removal (of the other way), is still occurring across a thus form of nothingness all along, bit by bit.

Quantum entanglement is a bizarre, counter-intuitive phenomenon that explains how two subatomic particles can be intimately linked to each other even if separated by billions of light-years of space. Despite their vast separation, a change induced in one will affect the other.
You are correct that the contemporary view of the expansion of the universe is that there will be a "big freeze", at its end, instead of a "big crunch", and, then, another "big bang".

Experimental evidence in the late 1990s and early 2000s (namely the observation of distant supernovas as standard candles; and the well-resolved mapping of the cosmic microwave background) led to the conclusion that the expansion of the universe is not getting slowed by gravity but is instead accelerating.
My own take on that, however, is that the expansion of the universe only appears to be accelerating in the relative sense, that matter becomes smaller until it "moves through itself", to come out the other side of itself, at which point, things appear to decelerate (toward a "big crunch"). Which would alleviate the impossible, one-sided definition, in general, of things derived from nothing, but, not returning to nothing. Which brought me back to some of my early notes, from decades ago. And, to some other things.