It was Albert Einstein. He had this theory called the theory of relativity. Basically time is relative to your situation. Now you have this ageless being that can operate without having to know time and space in relation humans can't, and we have a tough time with the concept of infinity. A day to him might be a billion years, or that could be his lazy afternoon. However, like most science on this level it can theoretically be done.
A more amusing question is to ask why the Sun and Moon were created on the fourth day.
Regardless, it's clearly written from the perspective of Earth's reference frame - night falls and day comes once between each passing. There is no appreciable dilation, it's entirely mincing words and trying to play off a theory you don't understand.
Besides if you compare the two you'll find them frighteningly similar.
Not in the slightest. Nothing in the Bible even suggests comprehension of things like the singularity, cosmic inflation - or even the more reserved expansion of spacetime itself, the very nature of matter and energy for the first picosecond of existence... need I go on?
Anyway, the Big Bang Theory can be projected back all the way to the point when something went off. Then they don't know squat.
The Big Bang theory only goes back to that origin. Other theories - testable theories - go back further. The Big Crunch model has been partially discredited, for example, while various patterns that Ekpyrotic theory would leave will be tested for with new satellites in the next decade or so.
Some are of course harder to prove than others - if we don't see a horizon, it's hard to show that the Universe is not for 100% certain a white hole.
Now if you have all the matter of existence, and don't through me multiple universes because that's a contradictory commentary in and of itself
The term multiverse is used because we have a very firm understanding of our currently visible Universe, and since it seems that separate universes will rarely if ever interact, the term is not entirely inappropriate. Also, how can you possibly criticize someone from a lexical perspective? That's just as bad as saying "Don't tell me about multiple worlds because the world by definition contains everything..."
, in one subatomic speck or whatever,
As you freely admit, you don't know what it is.
and one of Newton's Laws states "That an object in motion stays in motion until acted upon by an outside force, and that an object at rest stays at rest until acted upon by an outside force."
The Universe mimics a time-reversed black hole of unimaginable magnitude. No outside force is necessarily required. An easier to understand - if inappropriate - example, is to point out a bomb - from a firecracker to a hypergiant. The internal equilibrium is unstable, and it just goes off of its own volition.
Whats left? That speck at rest sure as hell ain't going nowhere. So what's left to bet the outside force.
And it hasn't. We're still the speck, we have not moved except at the expense of other parts of the speck.