The problem with the question of why is that you can always ask why again. Say we do understand the mechanism of the big bang. You can still ask “why” about why things are that way. Which is why in my view that’s still more of a “how?” “Why” is more of a question for philosophers than scientists imo.
I think the “why” exists only with the idea that the universe is directed in some way. e.g. “How can I see around my room”? Photons. “Why”? Because I turned on the light.
The problem with the question of why is that you can always ask why again. Say we do understand the mechanism of the big bang. You can still ask “why” about why things are that way. Which is why in my view that’s still more of a “how?” “Why” is more of a question for philosophers than scientists imo.
But is that not the same way with “how”?
How do objects fall to the ground? → the Earth exerts a gravitational force on them
How does Earth exert a gravitational force? → All objects with mass create a gravitational field that attracts other masses
How do objects create a gravitation field? → Mass warps spacetime and this curvature directs objects to follow paths towards the source of the mass
and so on, etc
I think the “why” exists only with the idea that the universe is directed in some way. e.g. “How can I see around my room”? Photons. “Why”? Because I turned on the light.