No, that is your misunderstanding of the first presentation of the theory. The first presentation also had an expansion of space because it, also, was based on general relativity. That, again, is NOT an explosion in any conventional usage of the term. Nothing was 'ignited'.<quoted text>
Yes, there is the theory of the particle that exploded. That was the first presentation of that theory.
You seem to have the idea (which I admit is common among the public) that the Big Bang envisions a little nugget that exploded sending matter and energy out away from it. That is not and has never been what the Big Bang theory says. The universe was once much hotter and denser and the *observable* universe was much reduced in size. But, the entire universe (not just the part we can see today) has always encompassed *all* of the space at any given moment of time. But the individual parts of the universe were (and are) all moving away from each other. There is no 'center' to the expansion: all points will see the universe as expanding away from them, just like we do.Now they have gone to a hot dense region. Still originating from a singular source.
Why would I expect to be able to do that? There are a great many things that my Aunt Susie will never understand that are still quite basic concepts. I don't expect Aunt Suzie to understand the concept of curved spacetime, but that concept is crucial for a valid understanding of the Big Bang theory.Now explain the mechanics in English. Where your Aunt Susie could understand it.