 But now consider the planet Vulcan. There is no collection of actual particles which were supposed to constitute Vulcan. So, if Vulcan is a non-actual possible object, which it apparently is, it seems possible for Vulcan to exist and not be constituted by any actual particles differently located and arranged. Likewise, it seems perfectly possible that Julius Caesar had a sixth finger which was not constituted by any actually existing particles and satisfied (a) and (b). Despite initial plausibility, actualist representationists may choose to deny such a possibility. To do so is, in effect, to commit oneself to the position that the universe, as it actually is, already contains maximally possible constituents of any possible state of the universe, that is, it is impossible for the universe to contain even a single constituent object not already in the universe as it actually is. To make this plausible is not an easy task. If, on the other hand, actualist representationists choose not to deny the possibility in question, they appear to have to say that Julius Caesar’s entirely new sixth finger is not an object but is possibly an object. But then the problem is to make sense of the finger’s being nothing yet possibly something. How can there be a true predication of any kind, including “is possibly an object”, of nothing? (Oliver &amp; Smiley 2013 offers the beginning of a partial answer to this question.)