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

If we know that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, why can we not say that there has always been something?If there has always been something, isn't that a sufficient reason for there being something rather than nothing?

The reality facing us is that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The fact that there is a vanishing point on the horizon does not mean that there is nothing beyond it. The Universe may not have always been but it did not pop out of nothing. Even if wherever it popped out of is undefinable.Our entire reality indicates causality. Why would you suspect that it does not exist on the other side of the hill just because you can not see over the hill?Or are you (and others) suggesting that energy can neither be created nor destroyed except for that one time?

Remember, one mark of a great teacher is to balance the pain with the suffering. My definition of energy never breaks down! Seriously then, there is a change. Receding to the BB and the point where everything breaks down. No time, no space, no energy. There is a change from one reality to another. That other reality is indefinable but I don’t see why it can not exist.My answer is that the definitions do not break down it is that they no longer apply. I understand.If you were to picture the Universe in your mind, would you see it from the inside or the outside? As soon as I imagine an outside to the Universe it becomes incorporated. I mean into or out of existence. Whatever the energy was before it was energy, it still existed.I guess that I am supporting the idea of an oscillating infinite continuum. (edit; and if such a thing exists I think that it answers the question why something rather than nothing.)Edited by Dogmafood, : No reason given.

And I think that you do it very well. I was just pointing out that I am partially aware of the extent of my ignorance. Blast away Is the answer dependant on which one of these scenarios is true?If the Universe expands to the point of heat death, could that be considered a state of nothingness? Another point where there is nothing to be measured. Does time exist then/there? There is something now and there will be nothing later. So the answer might be that there is something now because it is now. There was nothing before and wait a bit and then there will be nothing again. Sounds about right or at least I can relate to it but it seems to require that everything came from nothing. Would you characterize it that way?On the other hand, what would the big crunch look like 13 billion yrs later? Would it look like a big bang? Or is there no time after the crunch either? If the Universe does the BB/BC thing, does that answer the question (there is something because there has always been something) or is that an appeal to ‘brute’ fact that has been rejected as an answer?