True, tangible in the literal sense of the word, was not the correct word to use.
There's no incorrect here... I just want to explore ideas not debate or conflict. Any chiding is done with the clink of a glass.
What I meant by tangible was in context of what you said earlier for accounting vs. math where the former is perceivable (how I used tangible) and the latter, like pi, which is abstract.
Oh I see what you mean. Well, you're taking this in a weird direction but I like it: when money becomes virtual I will definitely be able to charge you .1 cents for something, or .01 cents. Why not pi cents ?
Money has been virtual for quite some time now in the digital age, but I was arguing that it will always be measured in a way that is perceivable: rounded to the nearest whole number, or at the maximum, 2 decimal places.
Even then... the more money there is the easier it will be to lose pennies... which is the end of a number system that is "real". (That's a math term too)
But will it be real ?
The marketable securities of any given entity, be they a person, a bank, or a country, will always be measured using the accounting method and I can't perceive a future where money ever becomes abstract in the mathematical sense.
What about activity based costing ? Ever use that ?
I actually agree with you but I am testing your theory.