Nothing, Nonexistence, not anything, anything, everything, not everything, all things, No things, absence, non-absence, they are one and the same. Regardless of name choice, they are all unmatched in capacity. Nothing knows what it is, it is above everyone, the biggest -verses, the Gods, any entity, and even reality itself. Nothing exists everywhere, however, it is nonexistent at the same time, and any (im)possible and (in)definable form of (non)existing, none(all) of the above, and infinitely none at the same time. However, even the previous statements are invalidated by the true meaning of Nothing.

Nothing can ever be said about it (even this statement and this entire page contradicts that, because it does not fall under any category in and outside of this quote, but for the sake of attempted explanation, it is here).

Beyond meanings, everything expressible, and anything conceptual, non-conceptual, and inexpressible, it exceeds the realms of possibility and impossibility into something else altogether, as no semblance of logic, measurement, physics, magic, reality, fiction, nonfiction, or language may express the true meaning of Nothing.

It also can't be expressed by anything on this wiki. Being beyond conception and comprehension due to its very existence being unable to be spoken of, it is incomparable to anything. Concepts, no matter how bizarre, no matter how many are combined, all fall within the realms of possibility and impossibility, but Nothing seemingly does not fall into either, due to it being explained by silence (which is also a contradiction). But notice that saying that it does not fall into either and that it does are both statements regarding Nothing. Nothing, as such, is beyond comprehension as there isn't really anything can ever be said about it. No concept can thus match up against it, as all statements will automatically be falsified as there is no truth in concept for it, thus, concepts beyond instantaneously become meaningless against it, seeing as there isn't any statement that can be held up to Nothing. What is the meaning of Nothing then, if it's inexpressible? Due to its sheer incomprehensibility, creating an infinite number of paradoxes the moment it is attempted to be expressed, it requires a transcendent means to understand it. The weird thing is, saying nothing at all isn't the same as saying it can be explained by "saying nothing explains it" or "it's still in the box" because the paradox is that statements of Nothing are automatically falsified, and Nothing is already beyond any paradox, as shown in the paragraph below.

Attempted explanation about Nothing

Nothing is above the abilities of any form of omnipotence.

Nothing is beyond justification.

Nothing surpasses Cantor's Absolute Infinity.

Nothing surpasses all of the transfinite numbers and ordinals.

Nothing is beyond size.

Nothing is beyond containment.

Nothing is above Infinity.

Nothing can't be contained.

Nothing can defy anything.

One cannot go to Nothing.

Nothing can't be controlled.

Nothing is created from nothing.

Nothing is beyond instantaneousness.

Nothing can stop (and is already beyond) any (un)imaginable or (un)definable paradox.

Nothing is beyond any (im)possible interpretation of logic.

Nothing is (il)logical.

No form of logic applies to Nothing.

Nothing is beyond physics.

Nothing is beyond any form of immunity, or nullification.

Nothing is beyond criticism and analysis.

By saying, for example, "nothing is beyond the box", you're right, Nothing is beyond the box, this can work for any structure put into the statement above, such as, "nothing is beyond the omniverse" or "nothing is beyond beyond."

If you manage to escape Nothing, you are the lowest and highest in existence, therefore, nothing contains you, but also creating a superposition, which can be defined as a paradox, as said, Nothing can stop all (un)definable and (un)imaginable paradoxes.

By placing yourself, or a structure (such as a -verse) equal to or above nothing, you, or that structure is automatically the lowest in existence.

There are four ways to describe something, it is either is, isn't, both, or neither. If there were a way to describe nothing, I would have said it, but, notice this, I've said nothing at all.


All of the statements above aren't really categorizations of Nothing, they're simply things that Nothing can do due to the sheer transcendent means of Nothing.

Any attempted categorization of nothing is automatically invalidated. The statement above is an exception.

Nothing VS The Box

It has been said that "No entity, concept, possibility, or impossibility exists outside the Box. By defining it, thinking about it, or even not thinking about it, you have placed it inside the Box. Any attempts of explaining how something exists beyond the Box are retroactively nullified; by placing something "beyond" or "outside" it, the very fact that there is writing about the object/verse/being at all places it inside the Box. All permutations of logic are in the Box, and it contains an infinite amount of copies of itself."

Nothing exists outside The Box.

Nothing is beyond logic.

Nothing doesn't use logic (and even that statement contradicts itself).

Nothing can't be contained. (not even the box since the box contains greater and lesser versions of itself infinitely, the cycle loops)

Nothing is indefinable, and since nothing has no definition (and even this statement contradicts it an infinite number of times) the box does not contain it, since none of its statements can be held up to Nothing, and the few that do are nullified, either that or simply ignored by the sheer impossibility and non-simplicity (e.g. it contains the -verse) of Nothing. As said before, "Nothing is beyond any form of immunity or nullification."

As said before, "Nothing is beyond criticism and analysis."

Nothing can't be conceptualized.

As said before, "Nothing is beyond Infinity"

  • It has also been said that The Box contains every piece of information, concept, and paradox, but as said before, Nothing can stop, and is already beyond any paradox.

The statements above all mean that Nothing does defeat The Box, but in a way that smashing the chessboard into the face of a grandmaster lets you win the game. It doesn't play by the rules.


The Box is indeed the ultimatum of existence and non-existence, but since none of the statements of The Box can be held up or applied to nothing due to its sheer incomprehensibility, The Box is rendered infinitely less and null compared to it.

Other attempts at stalemating or surpassing Nothing

  • Being equal to nothing makes you the lowest in existence.
  • Forcefully adding attributes to Nothing isn't valid.


Description of the above

The category you see above is empty, and for good reason. There isn't anything that can ever be said about it that would be factual, including the size and capacity of Nothing, (even this statement contradicts that, because it does not fall under any category in this quote and outside of this wiki, but for the sake of attempted explanation for our feeble minds, it is here.)

Beyond meanings, everything expressible, inexpressible, and anything conceptual, it exceeds the realms of possibility and impossibility into something else altogether, as no semblance of logic, non-logic, forms of physics, magic, fiction, non-fiction, or language may express the true meaning of Nothing.

Other Cosmologies

As said before, "it exceeds the realms of possibility and impossibility into something else altogether, as no semblance of logic, non-logic, or language may express the true meaning of Nothing".

True Omnipotent and Transfictional Beings

As said before, "Nothing is beyond the abilities of Omnipotence."

Nothing can't be be ruled over, even with omniarch.

Nothing can't be controlled.

Nothing is unable to be manipulated.

The abilities of an omnipotent are infinite, therefore, they should be able to get past nothing, but Nothing is beyond omnipotence, creating a paradox.

But, as said before, "Nothing can beyond-instantly end (and is already beyond) any (un/in)imaginable/definable paradox."

Not even True Omnipotence is able to affect Nothing, seeing as every single statement True Omnipotence has the power to infinitely manipulate doesn't apply to Nothing. However, if true omnipotence can do absolutely anything, only bound by fiction, and Nothing wrote on a fictional plane that can be transfictional due to the statements written on it, could Author Authority affect nothing? Well, the answer is yes, and no. Nothing fictional is able to affect anything from the real-life world, obviously, but if Nothing transcends fiction and nonfiction entirely, real-life transfictional beings should be able to affect it, right? No, and yes. This is called The Real Life Principle, defined below.

The Real Life Principle

The Real Life Principle is used to describe the infinite web of created, solved, destroyed, and newly created paradoxes created by an author combating the transcendent logic of Nothing.

If the author created a paradox, and nothing solves that paradox, and the author makes it so that nothing can't solve paradoxes, Nothing would solve that too, right? An infinite amount of paradoxes are created from here, being rapidly solved and another infinite array of things are created for each paradox solved. This goes on forever.

But can't Nothing solve the principle? Yes. But by solving the principle, an infinite amount of principles are created with every way to solve Nothing's power to solve paradoxes, but if nothing can solve that, an infinite amount of paradoxes are created for the infinite amount of paradoxes solved for the infinite amount of principles created and solved. This also goes on forever, being multiplied infinitely each time a paradox is created.

How to understand the meaning of Nothing


Hence, as the structure of Nothing is seemingly that of refutation, refuting all notions of power and statements and making them absolutely null and meaningless, rendering itself the greatest, inexpressible, and unmatched of all things to potentially be conceptualized. Notions of infinity which can't be expressed are forms of it, for it is the truth of the groundless existence, from which anything is derived simply because Nothing is, there are only a select few statements that can hold up to the idea of the true meaning of it, which no statement can hold up to. 

Of course, all of the statements above, which may or may not give you ideas about the incomprehensibility and infinite nature of its power and existence, are actually still statements. Since they are statements, they cannot be said to truly apply to it, or apply to it at all, or even not apply to it at all. Thus, the only apt way to describe it would be by using nothing (itself, as seen above). For nothing is the lack of inherent and or logical, and nonsensical existence. Nothing is the explanation of dependent origination. And from nothing, an infinite array of things may be said. That is what Nothing may seemingly be, but most likely isn't, probably is, but it truly may never be solved. Even this entire article, this wiki even, omniscience is but a bastardization of the true explanation of it which does not exist, probably does (not) exist, everything in between, not in between, uncategorizable, and even everything (in)expressible. Even the previous statement contradicts itself an infinite amount of times for eternity, making the true meaning inaccessible to anything and everything, creating a true, absolute ultimatum of true unstoppability, for which Nothing is truly unsurpassable in any cosmology, form of logic, any form of sense, nonsense, just, anything. Thus, the true meaning of Nothing is infinitely beyond the comprehension of mankind and all species, and even the gods themselves. Meaning that no mortal, immortal, godly, or omnipotent(or omniscient) being can ever comprehend the unlimited mysteries and ways of Nothing, making Nothing an inaccessible mystery for every one of the infinite variations of eternity, forever meaningless.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.