The Modal Discipline of Cosmic Origin: a Critical–Propositional Analysis of the Big Bang Theory in Confrontation with the Theory of Objectivity

This article presents an expanded critical–propositional analysis of the Big Bang Theory based on classical, technical, and observational cosmological bibliog- raphy, in confrontation with the foundational, recent, supporting, and dialogical bibliography of the Theory of Objectivity (TO). Its central aim is to examine to what extent standard cosmology satisfies the modal necessity requirements postulated by TO and at which points it remains ontologically insufficient. The paper argues that the Big Bang Theory is extraordinarily robust as a physical-observational description of the hot, expanding primordial universe, especially in light of the cosmic microwave background, primordial nucleosynthesis, metric expansion, and structure formation; yet such robustness does not amount to a complete ontology of the origin of the universe. From the Seven Absolute Truths of TO, phenomenic elements, Inductive Effects, Gödelian discipline, the Law of Logical Minimum, the cosmogonic theo- rem, and the cosmological Eras of the Theory of Objectivity, a reinterpretation is proposed according to which the Big Bang may be understood not as the absolute origin of being, but as a phenomenic phase of energetic, material, and informational exteriorization of a deeper genesis. In this perspective, the transcendent element is understood as knowledge or information produced in atomic relations and equivalent to atomic radiations. The article concludes that the relation between the Big Bang and TO should not be read as one of simple exclusion, but rather as one of epistemo- logical and ontological hierarchy: standard cosmology may be preserved as a highly successful description of an observable phase of the cosmos, while TO claims the modal, logical, and ontological level of ultimate foundation.