Has anyone argued this? I haven't formulated a coherent argument so I'm just throwing this out there to see if anyone has thought about this already. Intuitively I think it makes sense that everything must exist, that reality is an infinite multiverse. If true this offers an explanation for why we exist in this universe with these specific physical laws, because we must exist in this universe with these specific physical laws if reality is infinite. Furthermore, if reality is not only infinite but also eternal, with all time occurring simultaneously, if true this solves the problem of the infinite regress since there is no time before our universe existed if all moments of time are always occurring simultaneously. In short; all things, and all time, always.
Are there any arguments why everything must exist for something to exist? Are there any arguments for why something could exist without everything existing? For some reason I can't help but assume that the reason why there is something rather than nothing requires infinity. Why would some things exist instead of nothing unless all things exist? I'm interested to hear if anyone is familiar with arguments for or against this intuitive thought I hold.