[Scarblac]

> In my view nonnegative real numbers have good physical representations: amount, size, distance, position.

Rational numbers I guess, but real numbers? Nothing physical requires numbers of which the decimal expansion is infinite and never repeating (the overwhelming majority of real numbers).

[bmacho]

I should've mentioned nonnegative integers, as they correspond to the amount of discrete things.

I don't see any difference between rational numbers and reals. Their decimal expansion has nothing to do if they correspond anything physically existing or not, nor do any other difference between rationals and reals seem relevant.