Which number system is "best" for describing empirical reality?

TL;DR

This paper questions whether the real number system is the most appropriate mathematical foundation for modeling empirical reality, exploring alternatives and their potential advantages.

Contribution

It introduces the idea that the real number system might be sub-optimal for empirical modeling and discusses several well-developed alternative number systems.

Findings

Real numbers may be a 'wrong turn' for modeling reality

Alternatives to real numbers could better align with empirical data

The paper discusses potential benefits of different number systems

Abstract

Eugene Wigner's much-discussed notion of the "unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics" as applied to describing the physics of empirical reality is simultaneously both trivial and profound. After all, the relevant mathematics was (in the first instance) originally developed in order to be useful in describing empirical reality. On the other hand, certain aspects of the mathematical superstructure have by now taken on a life of their own, with at least some features of the mathematical superstructure greatly exceeding anything that can be directly probed or verified, or even justified, by empirical experiment. Specifically, I wish to raise the possibility that the real number system (with its nevertheless pragmatically very useful tools of real analysis and mathematically rigorous notions of differentiation and integration) may nevertheless constitute a "wrong turn" (a "sub-optimal" choice) when it comes to modelling empirical reality. Without making any definitive recommendation, I shall discuss several reasonably well-developed alternatives.