You're right. In fact a time loop has the same something from nothing problem any other theory has.

Imagine a flatlander universe. Package up time in another dimension and you can represent their entire existence as a static 3d cube. Timeloops would just be a static torus in the cube.

The same is true of a 3 spatial dimension + 1 time dimension universe. You can view it as a static 4d tesseract. Timeloops are just a 4-taurus. Where did that 4 Taurus come from? It's the same something from nothing problem.

It's something we learn very early in the philosophy of science, is that our vision of the world will always be inherently limited by the capabilities of our perception and the way we process it

with time loops. It began half way though me writing this sentence — that's the thing

There are only two alternatives for the origin of the universe: Either creation out of nothing, or no creation through eternal existence.

Both are hard to wrap your head around.

That's the thing about time-loops; you don't need to have a start and a beginning. There's a good movie about that concept; Interstellar.

Interstellar is pretty much nonsense even given the premise. Even if you are talking about time travel you can easily make something more plasuible than that.

Also Interstellar had information passing from the future to the past which isn't really what's typically sufficent to consider it a time loop.

The time loop is allowed by the current understanding of physics. The math checks out.

Interstellar has one, but for that topic I'd suggest Predestination: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_(film)

I'd also suggest watching it before reading that plot synopsis.

It's a metaphysical assumption, meaning beyond the realm of experimental science. Science has inherent limitations, and cannot be used to explain everything. This is a good starting point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If3cNUixEBM

How did I know before I clicked that link that it was going to be apologetics.

Faith is not a shortcut to knowledge. "Hey, we can't yet find the answer to big questions through rational means, so let's try irrational means!"

Interesting how you just said science "cannot be used to explain everything" and yet now you're claiming "proof" and "evidence" (i.e. science) for your particular religion. Make up your mind.