My problem with this discussion is the need for something visible or tangible. What I hear (no what I read) is that if you cannot hold it it does not exist. I don't think that is a valid reason to divide digital and analogue as not photography and real photography. If you do that and stick by it then how do you explain the fact the nothing floats around? You can't hold gravity, you can't see it so it is not real or it doesn't exist? Digital image is stored using magnetism. I don't need electricity to keep the the files intact. You can't see the file that is true but it doesn't mean it isn't there. You just can't see it or touch it they way you are used to. But it doesn't make it less real.
When a particle is magnetized a certain way on a hard drive it cannot be magnetized differently at the same time (serious lack of the English language or technology to put it into better words) so therefor that particle occupies a space and time in that certain state. It is just to small to see or hold it. And humans are not sensitive enough to feel it.

And again you don't have a negative if you don't introduce the film in developer and fixer first. So therefor in analogue photography you will never get a photograph or negative straight out of the camera. And in that regard both are the same.