I wouldn't say invented. I would say discovered. To me, math is just a particular kind of symbol game. All the math that ever could exist already does and you c

I wouldn't say invented. I would say discovered. To me, math is just a particular kind of symbol game. All the math that ever could exist already does and you could just enumerate formulas mechanically. What humans do is provide interpretations of the formula. I think Platonism is incoherent because most phenomena aren't approximations. Consider 'tree' or 'electron' which fail in different ways. An ideal tree is incoherent, tree is a fuzzy label not a category of objects. Every electron is identical and so the idea of there being a platonic electron makes no sense. I'm resisting your rejection of continuity but I can't quite articulate why to myself, it's something to do with 1 to 1 correspondences of possible measurements I think. Imagine some process which results in a particle moving in some direction. Moving from point to point is analogous to emitting some particle in any direction. And then you could imagine a sphere of detectors of any size. Saying that space is discontinuous is like saying "when the sphere is large enough its not possible to trigger 2 adjacent detectors because angles are not continuous" This seems false to me.