Well, I'm not sure exactly how foolproof it would be in every single particular circumstance, but I would believe that the best explanations are formulated via the sciences, extrapolation, and formation of analogies.

Generally speaking, of course there are always other factors as well.

If every explanation required an explanation then we would get caught up in an infinite regression of explanations.

I understand that the universe is finite, but that the process which encapsulates it is eternal. When regressed to a point prior to the creation of space, I'm not so sure that there is not still movement within this primordial thing, i.e. time within the primordial as opposed to macrocosmic time which is the time that is observed external to us as change.

Maybe this is similar to this other dimension, or potentiality you are referring.

So are we transferring the problem of infinite regression from a four dimensional spacetime continuum to an acausal continuum where there exists 'nothingness' between each of an infinite array of manifestations, or, universes?

A static eternal state of nothingness?

So this "potentiality" could not only exist in the absence of space, but in the absence of time as well?

So the proper context for this 'nothingness' would be that as a sort of abstract idea. This 'nothing' would be approached as the universe is regressed to its primordial origin.

I don't believe I have arrived at any scenario via this regression that results in a state of complete and absolute nothingness, but rather an acausal chain that functions in and out of time, ad infinitum.

So the universe is regressed to a point(no pun) prior to the aethereal expansion(inflation). Which results in a type of zero volume existence, or, zero dimensional point.

So this primordial zero volume existence would serve to engage some sort of elaboration as to what is meant by 'nothing', but not currently 'nothing' as in an 'absence of everything' scenario.