Example this question was closed as duplicate. It is a duplicate as a question and when one goes to the link one finds a good answer in fairly theoretical terms, the first part not really geared towards the level of the question, and certainly not of the question made duplicate.
In addition it offers what I call a " platonic physics view", i.e. beautiful theories have been found and are the miraculous mold on which nature is poured. One reason I keep my attention on this site is because it is dominated by theorists and graduate students of theory and the answers are geared towards the "platonic". ( the other is that I seem to be the only woman physicist here with some reputation :) and do not want to let the side down ). I try to inject the experimentalist's view."
Now the platonic view may be the correct view and vindicated if we find a TOE finally. I.e. :"Mathematics molds the world". But it is not the view we have now. The view we have now is continuously testing the mathematics against the data, and the only real, imo answer to such questions is that this is what observations tell us and we have modeled them mathematically successfully . I would not mind if the site was from graduate students up, but such type of questions come from enthusiastic young aspiring physicists and answers always biased towards theory are not a good guide for them. They must realize that data and experiments are what inspire the theories and a theory in the air is just mathematics. It is the kind of thinking, "if I think deeply I will solve the equations of the world" without a strong basis on the data base ,that generates the cranks.
Thus I tend to answer such questions , but I do not get to them fast enough before they become duplicate. Maybe the duplicate should be signaled for one day or two before making it impossible to answer a simple question with a simple answer.