> That is not true ... EM field is not "nothing", it is a thing that is everywhere and has properties. I feel that slightly trivializes the unknowns of what fi

> That is not true ... EM field is not "nothing", it is a thing that is everywhere and has properties. I feel that slightly trivializes the unknowns of what fields actually are and is a bit pedantic in the context of the comment you replied to. If fields are not nothing, okay, point to one. Show me it. Yes, they are a thing in the sense that we can measure their effect on other things that we can see and point to, but I think it's a huge rabbit hole to try to answer just what fields are. In many respects, fields are just a mathematical model of effects we see.