[baudrunner]

Subversion,

"Space and time are not conditions in which we live, but modes in which we think." (Albert Einstein)

Alright, so we agree that matter is not everywhere or else the universe would have to be infinitely dense. (Subversion)

That's a very unscientific observation. At least you should have said "infinitely material". You should remember that you are energy. Your conscious, cognizant, ergonomically constructed self exists as a temporary assemblage of cells that occupy a space which, relative to your context, is also energy, just a whole lot less dense than you so it only seems to be empty. Remember that there are essentially two types of particles: particles of matter (fermions), and particles of force (bosons). They both spin off time as a matter of course. That's how space provides the continuum for everything that occupies it. Remember, all particles have motion and that motion approaches light speed, at which point they would have infinite mass and infinite time.

"Nature abhors a vacuum" (Aristotle)

From optics.org, 29 December 1996:

According to quantum mechanics, empty space is not truly empty but instead contains fleeting electromagnetic waves and particles that pop into and out of existence.

From space.com:

True, the cosmos consists overwhelmingly of vacuum. Yet vacuum itself is proving not to be empty at all. It is much more complex than most people would guess. "But surely," you might ask, "if you take a container and remove everything from inside it - every atom, every photon - there will be nothing left?" Not by a long shot. Since the 1920s physicists have recognized that on a microscopic scale, the vacuum itself is alive with activity. Moreover, this network of activity may extend right down to include the very structure of space-time itself. (Sten Odenwald. Copyright (C) 1995 Sky Publishing Corporation.)

Odenwald goes on to discuss the experimental observation of the spontaneous creation of "virtual particles" between two metal plates placed in a vacuum. Physicists have predicted the existence of the Higgs field in the vacuum of space, which provides a "messenger particle", the Higgs boson, which interacts with electrons to give them mass. In other words, there is general agreement among the community of cosmologists and physicists that space is not nothing, nor is it "empty":

So to answer our question about whether a container of empty space is truly empty, the best anyone can do is remove the normal, physical particles that nature allows us to see and manipulate. The virtual particles can never be evicted. And in addition there may exist the ever-present Higgs field. (Sten Odenwald. Copyright (C) 1995 Sky Publishing Corporation.)

Furthermore:

We know that space-time is quite smooth down to at least the scale of the electron, 10^-20 cm - 10 million times smaller than an atomic nucleus. This is the size limit set for any internal component of the electron, based on careful comparisons between experiment and the predictions of quantum electrodynamics. But near the Planck horizon of 10^-33 cm, space-time must change its structure drastically. It may be a world in which conventional notions of dimensionality, time, and space need to be redefined and possibly eliminated altogether.(Sten Odenwald. Copyright (C) 1995 Sky Publishing Corporation.)

The accelerating structure at the Stanford Linear acellerator is pumped out to 1/100,000,000,000 of atmospheric pressure. That is only almost close to being a pure vacuum. I say almost, because nobody really knows what a pure vacuum is, and it is unlikely that one can be created. One thing is certain, even the vacuum of space is not as great as that, not by a long shot. There's just too much happening in it. Remember what Aristotle said.