The Ultimate Question - Why is there something rather than nothing?

Well, the inputs are essentially the matter content and maybe some topolgical information. For example, to get the space-time around a planet, star, or other "round" object, we just specify the spherical symmetry and zero mass/energy content outside the object. GR then spits out the Schwarzschild space-time along with, if the object is sufficently dense, the event horizon, and all the interesting space-time topology of the Einstein-Rosen bridge and the other universe sat the other side of the bridge!In the case of the cosmological space-times, we specify unformly distributed matter and radiation content, and also a comsological constant term. If we set the CC to zero, then we get the traditional Big Bang scenarios of open, flat, and closed, and if we let the CC take some small positive value, then we get the accelerating expansion space-times that we are now having to consider.

Crankdriver, you need a reality check from time to time with the method of your suggested visualizing 'cos your crapping off your mouth here does not draw any picture for me. I am sorry to inform you about that, professor.
Try this medicine:
index

Crankdriver, you need a reality check from time to time with the method of your suggested visualizing 'cos your crapping off your mouth here does not draw any picture for me. I am sorry to inform you about that, professor.
Try this medicine:
index

P.S. Trying this without a preclosing.

Well, my summary for what its worth.Despite some gallant attempts, no-one has in my view deduced the existence of something a priori.I agree with those who say that nothing should not be considered as intrinsically more probable than something.I still think that the question is ill-posed (yes, I know it's my question). The problem, as I said in the OP, is that "Why?" suggests that we are asking for an antecedent cause, which would be a thing, which would be the wrong question: like asking "Who makes it rain?", which wrongly implies that it's a person; or "How tall is jealousy?", implying that it has dimensions.But if we can't ask "why?" then we seem in need of a whole new interrogative, such as "whub?" At which point we cease to even have the impression that we understand the question, and can be certain that we won't understand the answer.Q: "Whub is there something rather than nothing?"
A: "Fubble."And that would seem to be the last word on the matter.