Well, that’s an easy one: nothing is no thing
What is no thing? It is some some space where even that cannot be understood to having a thing in it
It is another dimension without anything in it. I don’t consider energy, cosmic rays things, nor audio messages from outer space.Space is not a thing.
Nothingness is neither something, and it includes existence as it were some thing. That’s an existential jump to contain some thing which is really no thing.
Nothingness reduces even the slightest doubt of gamma rays, neural pathways, electromagnetic wave generations and radio waves generated by pulsars into merely the only connections between thought as energy and thought of it.
If I can say that connection is something, them indeed there is no difference between them.
There is, in a sense, but in another sense, there is nothing.
It seems useful to compare this paradox to the history of art through re presentation. Reality. Is something generally until modernity breaks it down, look at a woman one way, different angle, literally turning the woman around, and seeing it from one side, OR, looking at her with an angle as to why turning her around the first place
The mechanics are bizarre, hard to fathom why it happened, what for, turning a woman around ,for that obvious reason.
And a woman may think otherwise, while turning him around.
It all comes down to the same thing: is a cup half full, or half empty.
A cup is empty of water, or is it empty of air? - hot or cold.
Emptiness is empty of what is not apprehended, therefore what is not apprehended is full of it, and that is the ultimate convergence, :
If nothingness is not apprehended, does it mean it contains nothing, or, can it still contain some thing?
Can we assume nothing to be some thing, at least if the limits of that nothingness contain space and time?
If not, then a limitless space may not to be said to have spatial dimensions, and if there are things in there, that would be there virtually only as possibility.
Is it possible that potential points in space are a things?
Is a woman, hidden within probability merely a possible source for merely seconds of connective thingness, as for a man as well?
Then the pleasure of love is the reason for why she was created out of Adams rib.
Now is that some thing? Or better said, isn’t that something!