Quantum Heraclitus: No time. One moment immediatly follows the next with no interval between. None. It is infinitesimal in duration. Accordignly, it cannot have a middle point. It is a quanta of time - there is no smaller. C would be betwee A and B, so there would be one moment. I would argue right off the bat that this is wrong: The point where there is no charge, either positive or negative, would be infinitely small. As such, one could indeed perfectly balance the iron rod of infinite smallness upon it, hypothetically speaking. "Separating them with a zero" would be to not separate them at all. 1, 0, 2, 0, 3 is just extraneous. "To say that nothing is between 1 and 2 is to say that there is no space between 1 and 2". What makes 5 different from 4 and 6? The very act of moving implies segmentation. Any movement can be subdivided ad infinitum. As such, it's basic, quanta/monad, must be infinitesimal. To go back to the boiling kettles: You agreed, did you not, that one would boil quicker than the other. We said arbitrarily one would boil five minutes quicker than the other, correct? And these related to physical happenings: The water boiling. And you could ascribe a time to each, regardless of the fact that they took different times, yes? I do not ascribe to the reality of anything less than 3 spatial dimensions. But theoretically speaking, yes. The difference, however, would be that infinitesimally small planes could produce a substantial plane which is non-infinitesimal together. A zero-dimensional plane in the 3rd dimension (a two dimensional plane) could never do so. One would be "1 + 1" the other would be "0 + 0". I'll check the infinity one.