Abstract Shackel recently defended a revised formulation of what he calls ‘the nothing from infinity paradox’. In contrast to other well-known and unchallenged examples of ‘nothing from infinity’ in the literature, it will be argued here that the model he proposes (which would be far more surprising than the others if correct) fails to work as such. Quite the contrary, it is argued here that the form of dynamic evolution underlying it is actually rather trivial. The basis of this criticism contains an elementary foundation that is not contingent on conflicting theoretical assumptions and/or their debatable applications. It is built on the following commonplace: if we wish to determine how a system of particles evolves, the particles must be tracked. As trivial as this may seem, Shackel fails to do so, and in not doing so, is mistaken.
Jon Pérez Laraudogoitia (2026) studied this question.