> Unintuitive till you move your hand from here to there Continuity does not require the notion of a continuum. There need not be a "minimum length" even in a

> Unintuitive till you move your hand from here to there Continuity does not require the notion of a continuum. There need not be a "minimum length" even in a non-continuum approach. The rational numbers are perfectly fine for this because Zeno's paradox still applies -- between any two points is a halfway point, no matter what scale you look at. If you need more power you have the computable reals, which include all real numbers that it is possible to compute. The leap from the computable reals to the continuum is a huge, vast leap -- in measure theoretic terms you are going from a measure zero set to a non-zero-measure set. But all you get from that leap is access to a bunch of numbers that it is not possible to construct anyway, where I mean "not possible" in the strict, formal, definitional sense -- it is literally impossible to produce an example of one. Only the Axiom of Choice and similar nonsense even let you reason about these, the "zombies" of the OP.