>>11891980There is no nothing in something, but the absence of some thing in something (or some thing) could more accurately be characterized as the nothing of that thing since it's not there to be (something), and further, as a nothing of that thing, you can't responsibly ascribe the nothing to that particular thing, it's fairly arbitrary, therefore the nothing of that thing is really just nothing. Since nothing has no recognized bounds, limitations, or applicable units of measurement, it is infinite, thus there is infinite nothing in all somethings, infinite somethings actually. Since there is infinite nothing in infinite somethings, and nothing, again, have no recognized bounds, limitations, or applicable units of measurement, all somethings are actually nothings by nature of being infinite.
