"You're sort of just spinning words there though. I could just as easily say that nothing doesn't exist. So everything must exist. And the sum of everything must include nothing, or else it wouldn't be everything. So nothing must exist."

That might be convincing if nothing were the opposite of something, but it isn't. If nothing was the opposite of something, then it would be true that something can't exist without nothing. But something does exist without nothing, because nothing doesn't exist as anything but a concept. It's a symbol that points to itself.

I'm also curious as to what you mean by "I think there's better evidence in favor of nothing than of something." We're here, we're something That's evidence that something exists. Where is nothing? When we use the word, we usually don't mean it in a literal sense. "What's in that box?" "Nothing." But there is something in the box, if only air. Even vaccuums can't be perfectly empty, there's always something there.

Ah, and thanks Junkyard. Gotta return some books to the library tomorrow, I'll see if I can't find it.