Philosophy at large has lately gotten the basic premise wrong;
The question of existence versus non-existence is a false opposition. Nothing can describe a state of non existence since it is a negation of itself. Yes, countless of years of ontological deep thoughts just got reduced to that, because sometimes the summary is correct.
If we are to abide by the hindu models, entropy and syntropy are packaged together, within the concept of 'Brahma's breath'. Of course branching multiverse concepts take a step further, and why should infinity not actually live up to its maddening potential?
It's not like there is another game waiting after we 'figure this out'. Which is good reason to assume that we can only approximate.
And perhaps we will find out we have been shell-gamed; correct about essential mechanisms but locked out of interacting with any of their responsible parties.
So a game folding in upon itself, where you conceptually figure it all out, yet the reward is nothing at all. A little like Douglas Adams statement about 42, and the real 'solution to the universe' leading it to collapse upon itself and restart.
And then, perhaps there would be a an infinitely recursive matrushka situation going on.
Sorry, i got a bit wild with this tangent, its in my nature.
Hey actually i think i've returned to Anselm's ontology;
'God is always one step further than the maximum capability you assume'.