Love this article but would like to dispute the author's notion of "real". In the post, he shows that the frequency domain is not special, in the sense that there are infinitely other equally valid representations.

But many places are real without being special - other than to those who make special use of them!

I'd argue a real place is one that affords the operators that allow us to inhabit and interact there -- stuff like object permanency, adjacency and distance. If things can be organized and sustained there, are they not real?

It's fun to imagine what kinds of structures can inhabit the frequency domain - or any other.