Nothing can exist

I will begin by thanking my opponent for further defining their position. I certainly did not pick the wording of the topic in order to ensure a win! I simply opted for the most basic statement "Nothing can exist". This was by way of avoiding unnecessary semantic argument. In reality, words and the value we assign to them are important to the discussion, you began your argument with definitions. I have already proved there is as yet no true vacuum. I propose the semantic argument presented by my opponent is an example of recification. The fallacy of treating an abstract as if it were a real thing. Nothingness is neither transcendent nor immanent and is therefore not capable of being. Now to the article presented as evidence for the existence of nothingness. The article entitled "Great 'cosmic nothingness' found" relies on both the theory of dark energy and Integrated Sachs-Wolfe Effect in order to explain the "void" . I propose that connectivity in space is the reason that the "void" is not a void in a true sense. Rather a word able to provide a relative perspective of what is there by abstraction. I quote from the BBC (Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk...) "The idea that there is a nothingness at the heart of nature has exercised philosophers and scientists for millennia, from Thales's belief that all matter was water to Newton's concept of the Ether and Einstein's idea of Space-Time. Recently, physicists have realised that the vacuum is not as empty as we thought and that the various vacuums of nature vibrate with forces and energies, waves and particles and the mysterious phenomena of the Higgs field and dark energy." In order to discredit the notion that the void fond here is a void in the true sense I look to the science underpinning the articles findings. The concept of dark energy is described by NASA as 70% of the make up of our universe and as mysterious. "Albert Einstein was the first person to realize that empty space is not nothing. Space has amazing properties, many of which are just beginning to be understood" (Source: http://nasascience.nasa.gov...) The Integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect is a property of CMB or cosmic microwave background radiation. It "is also caused by gravitational redshift, however it occurs between the surface of last scattering and the Earth, so it is not part of the primordial CMB. It occurs when the Universe is dominated in its density by something other than matter. If the Universe is dominated by matter, then large-scale gravitational potential wells and hills do not evolve significantly. If the Universe is dominated by radiation, or by dark energy, though, those potentials do evolve, subtly changing the energy of photons passing through them" ( http://en.wikipedia.org...) Note protons passing through them are changed!!!! What is changing protons if they are changed there must be some interactions- movement- some inertia or active power. This is strengtened by the discovery of Higgs fields. (Source: http://www.bun.kyoto-u.ac.jp...) Are you then proposing that no photons, bosons, electromagnetic fields, are in this "void"? a cubic metre of empty space contains nothing for light to bounce off, however there is no space where there is nothing. Contents include; light, radio waves, x-rays, gamma rays, electro magnetic waves, gravity waves and particles such as neutrinos, cosmic rays etc., and even resident particles depending upon where you are in space. Atoms are interesting because they take it to a microcosm which is being studied on earth in particle accelerators (e.g. CERN), atoms are full of fields holding them together, they are not static but fluctuating in quantum uncertainty and in themselves create matter and anti-matter. This is a good guide to what is happening in the wider universe. Nothing is an elusive concept since when we look in detail at the universe what appears empty is in fact seething with activty. The thing that is expanding is space itself. It should be conceptualised like a rubber membrane. We call the acceleration of stretching dark energy. It is not expanding into anything - it is expanding itself. I would like to finish by thanking my opponent for making my first debate so interesting. I only wish we had more time to debate. Best wishes and kind regards.