Welcome to hypography, therammo!
Please feel free to start a topic in the introductions forum
to tell us something about yourself.
The basic premise proceeds from the assumption that the probability of a world coming into existence exactly like our own is greater than zero (we know this because our world exists). If space is infinite, then cosmology tells us that our existence will recur an infinite number of times.
This concept is conventionally known as “eternal return
”. Variation of it are thousands of years old in philosophy and religion. In science, it appears in the mid 19th Century. Its present scientific status, in terms of how accepted it is as likely to be true, has declined since the mid 20th Century, when it was widely accepted (though, dealing as it does with time scales too big to be of practical value, not considered very important)., in large pard due to observations in the past 50+ years that have effectively refuted the simplest early 20th Century ideas of a closed, cyclical universe
The Wikipedia link above has lots of summaries and references to the idea, and is worth a thorough reading.
Speaking of logic, the only reasonable answer would be that we indeed are living in an eternal and infinite space, where big bangs are occurring infinitely without need for cause.
An affirmation of the concept of eternal return is not the only reasonable answer to the question it proposes. Such a conclusion requires a lot of assumptions about physical law, many of which are contradicted by data.
Therammo, by “big bangs” in the above, do you mean “big bounces”
? As I mentioned above, this model is largely rejected now by cosmologists, with only a few purely hypothetical models and fringe science ideas supporting it.
The idea that the universe expands eternally, and an possibly endless series of big bangs occur due to large scale quantum fluctuations in the nearly empty space that results, doesn’t have the same status as a largely rejected theory as the big bounce, but because of its lack of practical application, like the big bounce and eternal return, has been little developed as a scientific theory. (For more on this idea, search the phrase “nothing cosmology”, of see the Wikipedia page of one of its first (1973) proponents, Edward Tryon
An IMO delightful fictional realization of a big bounce can be read in the Hugo-nominated 1971 novel Tau Zero
According to this theory, I will live the same life again and again for eternity. Is this proof that we indeed may be living in hell? A hell we can't escape... ever...
Assuming eternal return to be true, and discarding mystical, nonphysical ideas like the existence of immortal, conscious souls, none of us would be aware of having lived the same life over and over many widely separated () times. So while the idea may seem hellish, our human experience of eternal return would be no different than the experience of a “one time only” universe.
You seem to be touching on the basic philosophical conundrum of existentialism
I have a problem with the premise that we live in a random universe.
That the universe is random, in a true mathematical sense, isn’t a requirement of various eternal return theories. As described in its Wikipedia article, the first physics treatments of such a theory, ca 1871, used purely deterministic, classical Newtonian physics. Perhaps the most famous treatment of the idea, Poincaré recurrence theorem
(1890) is purely mathematical. Interestingly, in my experience, this theorem is now useful largely in the study of computer simulations of dynamic systems, rather than of physical systems themselves.