Imagine nothing. What do you see? Dark empty space empty of galaxies, stars and planets. But not only would there be no matter, there would be no space or time either. Not even darkness. And no sentient life to observe the nothingness. Just … nothing.
Why is there something rather than nothing. Nothing is nonsensical. It is impossible to conceptualize nothing. Not only no space, time, matter, energy, light, darkness or conscious beings to perceive the nothingness but not even nothingness.
Nothing is something. It is a logical fallacy to talk about ‘Nothing’ as if it were a ‘Something’ that ceases to exist. Here we bump up against the problem of defining what we mean by ‘Nothing’ and the restrictions that language imposes on the problem.
The very acting of talking about ‘Nothing’ makes it a ‘Something’. If by ‘Nothing’ is meant no physical objects or matter of any kind, there can still be energy from which matter may arise by natural forces guided by the laws of nature.
Nothing excludes creation ex nihilo. If by ‘Nothing’ is meant that there is no physical, mental, platonic or nonphysical entity of any kind, then there can be no God or Gods, which means that there can not be anything outside of ‘Nothing’ from which to create ‘Something’.
‘Nothing’ is unstable; ‘Something’ is stable. Asking why there is ‘Something’ rather than ‘Nothing’ presumes ‘Nothing’ is the natural state of things out of which ‘something’ needs an explanation. Maybe ‘Something’ is the natural state of things, and ‘Nothing’ would be the mystery to be solved.