What is the cause of existence?

I was just checking to see if anyone else noticed that, FM.

Apparently Windevoid is gone with the wind and is now void.

You haven't addressed the problem either even if you shift from the admittedly dodgy "why" for the how or what question...how is there something rather then nothing assumes nothingness can be explained or that the concept refers to a potential state of affairs but on a closer look no one has ever given a proper account on the foxy theme of nothingness !

My personal vision is that there always was something, some form or variant of big bounce must be true, and that nothing is a relative simple minded concept solely applicable in common sense context such as there is nothing in the freezer or similar assertions...when this metaphorical usage is stretched the word collapses n becomes meaningless.

to a chemist or molecular biologist playing with what caused life, those three mechanisms (bond, linkage an kinetics) are all we have (unless you want to add "And then a miracle happens"?)

And why would I want a miracle ??? Where did you get the impression I crave for such a nonsense? I just pointed out the problem of why there is something rather then nothing starts from a bad presupposition regarding nothingness as a valid concept...

I don't know, youre responses are mostly vague for whatever personal reasons, so You've never "counted out" anything. I don't really follow most members other contributions unless they show up frequently in those threads that Im also interested in.

SO, if you have any alternative hypotheses, I think you could present them for discussion. That would be nice.

But I just did explain it to you, the question starts with the wrong assumption that "nothingness" is a meaningful concept and yet no one so far has shown or clarified it. At best nothingness is a self contradictory concept, "nothingness is nothing", it is not, there is no nothingness to start with. Nothingness is a conceptual frame that makes sense in space time transitions of state of affairs on which "identity" is replaced (A becomes B) but not a concept that can have an absolute application. So in answer to the question why is there something rather then nothing, the only plain simple honest answer is that there is always something because there is no nothingness, and all we can do is to observe the transition from one state of affairs to another...as Lavoisier once pointed out, nothing is created, nothing is lost, all is transformed !

Youre losing me. Im a "Data" kind of guy. Give me some data and evidence. Philosophical bullshit is just that.

"Existence" doesn't exist until there is something to sense it. Therefore this whole discussion is about evolution of sentient life.

I was going for the full extent question and not addressing the "existence" in the sense of awareness which is a tricky business I rather wait some decades n ask a robot if he is "alive" so I leave it to you to dwell on that if it pleases you..."philosophical bullshit" is your lack of insight and quite frankly plain old good knowledge on the problem of being at large in opposition to non being, but your ignorance is not an argument to go on classifying bullshit what either you don't or don't want to understand. The "I am a data kind of guy" is not impressing either farm, you seam a fairly intelligent bloke, so you ought to address the "data" about whether or not "nothingness" is a meaningful concept to start up with before you validate the question.

Well, this is just one option I am considering, but maybe there are greater forces at work here that we do not know, and understand about. Maybe the cause of existence was because something outside of existence wanted it to. I know it sounds religious, but it is a valid point.

Wouldn't something outside of existence need exist in order to create something ? Can you see the contradiction ?
By definition there is no bigger set then reality. (yes I am counting abstract objects also)

I don't know, but I'm talking about entities that exist outside of creation and the Universe. These are matters in which I have no experience to, but it is a valid point, I think.

Entities either inside or outside our Universe/"creation" must exist, so the expression "out of existence" cannot apply... further, the set of all entities, things, is bigger then an isolated creator creation sub sets aside each other...Reality is all things and reality as a WHOLE cannot/could not be created...an infinite regress of causes is not an argument...see Zeno's paradox...

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes

Yeah. Makes sense. But then again, religion is not based on reason, but faith.

If you need "God" seek for an extremely rational definition of God n not for fairy tails...Nature itself as a whole with all its mathematical beauty n order is the best practical definition of God you would ever need to seek...

True. I, personally do not believe in any religion extremely, but I find their stories useful, maybe not for science, but for historical evidence. Sure, some stories may be exaggerated, but we must keep an open mind to what the data can give us. The Bible shows what the ancient Israeli, and Christians believed in, show we can understand their culture.

Not believe 'extremely'?
Either you believe or don't - There is no middle ground.

Agnostics seem to hold the middle ground.

But, apologies, I don't know how extremely got into that.

'Religion' = Way of life.
Every living thing is religious.

That is a very deep and clever observation...(don't let no one tell you otherwise)