+Courtney GibbonsI believe you are right, I do assume an answer, and we can't create a non axiomatic model to proof that nothing could exist there, this wouldn't even make sense, it would be similar to creating "nothing" in order to see if it could sustain "something" in some way.

My opinion of course.

However, I can thing of few ways to proof that no object can exist outside of an axiomatic system, but indirectly.

For instance, what if it is proven that in order to exist, that which is to exist has to "be" something, that to "be something" implies having at least a "quality", which implies "description", which implies an "axiomatic system".

A 3d square exists, therefore, it's existence implies that it exists within an axiomatic structure that allow height, width, length, volume, value an so on.

Can we honestly believe that mathematics are not an intrinsic part of this universe?,

When we talk about different mathematics, are we not talking about the employment of the same mathematical structure but with different values or descriptions?.

Am I wrong to believe that there can't exist nothing without a mathematical description? And therefore, that whatever is has to be within the constraints of an axiomatic system?

What are your thoughts on this? Am I confused?