You may disagree but you proved my point in your own reasoning with "having nothing is not an opposite of anything (other than having something i suppose)" .
To answer your question: every emotion that is not love is simply not love. You are attributing indifference to another emotion or emotional state. I presuppose that indifference is a thing (just like zero) that is the opposite or null position of having some xx feeling. Your threshold has to have a point of reference and that threshold I propose is indifference (or 0 on a number line). Having an emotion is something to whatever degree you have it. Not having it is it's opposite. You are attributing an inconsistent definition. Using the numbers example 5 is something. 0 is something and -5 is something. They all have definitions and meaning and attributes and can be described. The degree to which you love increases in magnitude (puppy, lust, selfless, true etc.) the further you are from indifference, and thus, inversely reduces itself to indifference (0).
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari