I was arguing with my wife today. She believes that 'nothing' doesn't exist as a physical thing, and that everything is something, that there is no such thing as 'nothing', that there is no such thing as the absence of something because even the void is a thing.

I argued on the other hand that nothing is very much real and that 'something' would be meaningless without 'nothing'. Looking beyond the obvious metaphysical implications of 'nothing' and just looking at what the literal physical meaning of nothing is, it puts distance between things.


Look at atoms as science looks at them. They cannot physically be made to touch due to magnoelectric forces that result in the actual particles never touching each other, none of the atoms in your body ever touch each other. Look at an atom itself and the size of the nucleus compared to the distance of the electrons orbiting it is ridiculous. We are made of atoms, made of matter, yet at the same time I would argue it is the very abscene of matter, the 'nothing' and the way matter shapes itself around it that defines us. You take away 'nothing' and everything suddenly becomes infinitely close to each other, identity becomes meaningless.

Neither of us are scientists and have no background in physics. She's an english teacher and I studied biology at uni only to work in finance and sell loans to retards, so I ask you, /sci/ - who, if anyone, is right? Or are we both retards?

Pic unrelated, it's a bag full of my teeth.