Why is there something rather than nothing

Why is there something rather than nothing?
An answer is that we cannot say.
Explorations in physics may explain the beginnings of the universe,
but not its origin, we could say.
The mantra of bombardment and collision
looking for that which is fundamental
and to explore it further
might dwell inside of sceptical regress,
one of the Trilemmas of Agrippa.
Another of which leads back
to where we started.
That is, the question.
And the last, a certainty
To which we may ascribe the trait:
no beginning and no end.
It is what it is.

If the Higgs is the last,
or string theory be right,
what we have is still some thing.
So we trace again to the lemma,
saying that there was a first:
energy or matter,
it doesn’t matter.
For by Einstein,
they are linked by a thing:
we call it light.
A constant effect,
simply present.

Which came first,
somethingness or nothingness?
If it were to be nothingness, then how did anything come to be;
and if it were somethingness, how did it come about.
Which of these two did you choose to be true;
your preferred mystery.

Physics from physics.

Have we really determined the existence of all the fundamental particles of physics?

Is it at all plausible that the experiments that facilitated the discovery of lower level fundamental particles actually created those particles. Do the collisions rather than help discover constituent entities actually create them in a similar manner to breaking biscuits into crumbs. Putting the crumbs together doesn’t make the biscuit, does it?

In the quest of physics to determine the fundamental particles and their characteristics, are any of these situations likely:
That there’s always a more fundamental particle.
That if they get to a fundamental particle, they would likely find that its characteristics cannot be explained by physics/mathematics.
That its behaviour mimics those of the particle from which it was obtained in a similar way to fractals. As you focus on parts of the image, you see a semblance of the whole in it; displaying self-similar patterns at various magnifications.

Let’s just say that physics really works, that they aren’t like crumbs…