Are there any counter proofs against everything being entangled before and after the Big Bang?

Question

If particles are emitted simultaneously (or quasi-simultaneously) by the same entity then they are entangled.

Also I refer to entanglement not only to maximally entangled states but more essentially to mixed entanglement and maximally entangled states would only be a special case of many tiny states entangled together.

Can we say the same thing about the quanta "generated" during the Big Bang or did entanglement "break" during the Big Bang ? What about a "gradient" of entanglement from concentrated entanglement to a mixture of extraordinary many entangled "tiny" states ?

Can we think of everything before the Big Bang as being like a huge tensor network (of entanglement) to some degree ? Why not ?

Can we preserve the idea that everything after the Big Bang was still a huge tensor network to some degree ? Why not ?

Also let's think of 2 Helium Atoms A and B. Let's name A1 electron from orbital 1s and A2 electron 2s from A atom. Similarly B1 electron from orbital 1s, B2 as 2s elecron from B atom. Let's entangle A1 with B1, A2 with B2 using 4 entangled photons. Electrons being so entangled they still have the freedom of staying in their orbitals.

Let's take 2 Pb atom and do the same for each electron.

Let's take n Atoms and divide them into M groups and entangle each electrons with their respective counter part in the other group(s).

In the view of not maximally entangled particles, could one argue against to the generalization of the example above ?

What about ER=EPR (replace entanglement with "wormhole" in each of the questions above and create new "questions" with wormholes - charge-less and charged [...]) ?

Juan Maldacena - Entanglement, gravity and tensor networks Strings

Leonard Susskind - Entanglement and Complexity: Gravity and Quantum Mechanics

The Particle Problem in the General Theory of Relativity

Answer 1

You've asked many questions, but they all seems to boil down to a basic understanding of entanglement and how it refers to the universe as a whole.

Particles that are emitted simultaneously by the same entity are not necessarily entangled. To have entanglement one needs to have a superposition of different tensor products of states such that the complete thing cannot be factorized.

So if the universe as a whole was entangled due to the process of the big bang, then it means it is in some superposition where each term in the superposition differs from the others in such a way that the whole thing cannot be factorized. In effect, one can consider this as a superposition of different universes. This is like the many worlds interpretation. (Although we don't know whether the world really works like that, we can still use this interpretation to get a feeling for what it means for things to be entangled.)

Due to the statistical nature of quantum physics, interactions are highly likely to produce entanglement. Since there were lost of interactions going on during the big bang, it is reasonable to assume that the universe as a whole was entangled. But we don't see it. Either this is because we are in just one of the many universes according to the many world interpretation. Or the universe constantly collapses to just one universe. Whichever mechanism is at work we don't know and I don't think we can ever know.