Those models may be interesting, but are not science. The wider origin of the universe is not for science to answer, since observations 'beyond' the Big Bang are physically impossible. As an analytical chemist, Brad, you know very well that science is based on observation and experiment (as an experimental biochemist I am acutely aware of that too). Mathematical models are useful and necessary to interpret these, but on their own they are not science. Unfortunately in their misguided hubris some theoretical physicists want to pervert the meaning of science, but in the end they will not succeed. I hate fake science just as much as I hate fake news.
From a philosophical perspective I have my own ideas about the origin and nature of the universe, but these necessarily go beyond what science can probe. For the reason mentioned, there cannot be a 'scientific' view of what caused the Big Bang, or if we live in a simulation or not, for example.