I saw part of a video on the internet having to do with the origin of the universe. The video said that there was no emptiness before creation. This seems right to me. Yet it said that the original universe was “small” like a grain of sand. It then supposedly “expanded” to its current size. But the concept of “small” is incoherent without a context of space against which it is contrasted. If space itself was created and is itself part of the universe, then space is what gives coherence to the concepts of size. So how can the universe be described as “small” and “expanding” since “small” and “expanding” themselves are incoherent without some invariant against which they are contrasted to give meaning to the very terms? I have been told that the problem could be solved by an appeal to the invariant speed of light. Thus, the time it takes light to traverse the expanse of the universe is increaing with the age of the universe. But this doesn’t seem to work since the concept of “speed” is understood as a function of distance and time. But if distance itself is expanding, then it doesn’t make sense to even define the speed of light as invariant. Something seems wrong in the way the matter is set up in the first place.