Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The proposition that infinity is "real" As far as I can tell, numbers aren't real either. "Twelve" isn't a thing that exists in itself in the physical universe, it's an abstraction over some features of reality. "Infinity" is another abstraction, but it's not the same kind of abstraction as "Twelve". It's a further step. All mathematics is abstractions, layered on each other. See also "God created the integers, all…
Agreed, but I can say "there are 102 keys on this keyboard" or "there is 105ml of coffee in this cup" and that meaningfully describes reality to some extent. "there are infinite stars" does not meaningfully describe reality. For a number of reasons, not least of which would be how we would verify that - we cannot count the stars if they are infinite because we would need an infinite amount of time to do it. We can't…
You can, but are there? Is the space bar grouped with them? You can decide either way, and either choice is defensible, so the count is dependant on our human categories.
Each key is unique, with the printed letter and with the precise arrangement of atoms differing. None of them are interchangeable. So you could decide that each key is in their own category. Or you could throw them in a bag with some dice and pebbles too and count the objects. Numbers are regarded as interchangeable, one "102" is the same as any other "102". Physical objects are not.
That's what I mean by saying that counting is an abstraction, and a number isn't a thing that exists in itself in the physical universe - it only occurs not "in itself", but once we can subjectively group things. There are "twelve keys" if you decide to group them as the same thing though they're actually not really. There's no physically existent "twelve".
I fully agree that "infinity" is a different kind of concept, less physically relatable even than "102". It's a further abstraction.