I think the word “absurd” is better applied to your conception of existence and not so much to existing things. This is why we ought to rid ourselves of such mental containers—“existence”, “universe”, and so on—to make room for the less contrived. Any set of things is not itself a thing. — NOS4A2

Oh yes?

What is X? What is a truth statement? What justifies X action? Yeah. — schopenhauer1

You think that when we determine what something is, or what is true, or what justifies an action, we disturb ourselves with something completely beyond our control? All these determinations relate to how we live and conduct ourselves, which are things in our control. Why there is something rather than nothing, though, does not.

Why there is something rather than nothing, though, does not. — Ciceronianus

You don’t know unless you think about it. Thinking about it is in our control.

Thinking about it is in our control. — schopenhauer1

Certainly, you may think about what why there is something rather than nothing if you wish. I don't say you can't; I say you shouldn't, unless you want to disturb yourself about something completely beyond your control. Like why you're not Arthur Godfrey, or Jimmy Durante, or nothing at all, instead of yourself.

unless you want to disturb yourself about something completely beyond your control. — Ciceronianus

Theoretical physics of how the universe works is out of my control. It just is what it is. Some physics has no real use for humans. Should we not think about it?

Theoretical physics of how the universe works is out of my control. It just is what it is. Some physics has no real use for humans. Should we not think about it? — schopenhauer1

I have to admit I don't know enough about theoretical physics to say whether it may have a "real use." I suspect it may, but don't know. It strikes me that it has a real use for someone who is a physicist, obviously, if they for example are paid for being one. It also seems from what I read that physics may be used in technology.

Regardless, though, I think there's a distinction between considering how the universe came to exist and considering why it came to exist, and why not nothing. Considering how the universe came to exist may actually be answerable, and the answer to that question may provide insight into how things work, which may be of benefit to us. To the extent the question why there is something instead of nothing doesn't seek to determine how things came to be, I don't think it's an answerable question at all. Do we want to concern ourselves with an unanswerable question--something that isn't a question?

But the axiom at we shouldn't disturb ourselves with things beyond our control addresses well-being, wisdom, living the good life, primarily. Seeking answers to pseudo-questions is certainly to pursue something outside of our understanding, and in that sense control.

It strikes me that it has a real use for someone who is a physicist, obviously, if they for example are paid for being one. It also seems from what I read that physics may be used in technology. — Ciceronianus

So I stated that the info may be if no applicable value. And indeed it is important to the researcher as is some metaphysics that isn’t applicable is to the philosopher.

To the extent the question why there is something instead of nothing doesn't seek to determine how things came to be, I don't think it's an answerable question at all. Do we want to concern ourselves with an unanswerable question--something that isn't a question? — Ciceronianus

Why not? Does reading a fiction matter other than it being of some value to the reader of the book?

But the axiom at we shouldn't disturb ourselves with things beyond our control addresses well-being, wisdom, living the good life, primarily. Seeking answers to pseudo-questions is certainly to pursue something outside of our understanding, and in that sense control. — Ciceronianus

Not sure why it’s bad in any way. It’s something we can pose. That in itself means something. I’m just against limiting inquiry because it follows some pat answer or because it sounds cool to be more practical. There’s nothing inherently wrong with asking questions that might not have an answer. At least you haven’t provided a justification for not pursuing things, especially if it can be applied to any number of frivolous things we do. I guess if it is causing anxiety it can be a hypothetical imperative to refrain from it but unsure if that is the OPs problem necessarily.

Also sometimes frivolous seeming questions can lead to ideas adjacent so there’s even utility value in it for idea generation.

For example the OP has me thinking on the idea of the necessity of existence vs it’s contingency, modal logic and universes, a persistent apeiron that can’t not be, views of nowhere, perspective from nothingness.