So... the assertion is that physical things are real and numbers are not? It&#x27;s alluring to accept this axiom, but when challenging a platonic view of mathematics, I don&#x27;t think that we should accept that without discussion.<p>In other words, I&#x27;m supposed to entertain that math is a fictional tale with fanciful characters called &quot;numbers&quot; that don&#x27;t exist outside of the story, but the boundaries of so-called physical objects are so apparent that they shouldn&#x27;t be questioned?<p>Most physical boundaries are arbitrary, part of the stories that we tell ourselves, and not meaningful in a deep sense. I&#x27;d like to know how mathematics, and numbers in particular, are different.<p>[As an aside: Is it possible to convincingly argue that &quot;this is larger than that&quot; without using numbers?]