jackjack2025 said:
@Ibix and the rest of us are quite comfortable with Cantor and transfinite cardinalities.
However, cardinality has nothing to do with metric expansion. No one is trying to say that the the cardinality of the set of stars now is less than the cardinality of the set of stars a moment from now.
We are not talking about counting rooms at all. We are talking about measuring the length of the carpet between rooms. The guests go to the beach for the day with 10 meters of carpet between adjacent rooms (for instance) and arrive back at the hotel to find 11 meters of carpet between adjacent rooms.
The guests do not have to run a measuring tape from one end of the hall to the other to observe such a change. They only have to measure one pair of rooms. Or enough to get a statistically significant sample.
In practice, the measurements that are made are not done with measuring tapes, of course. We use spectra, luminosity, time delays and various other hints to put together a coherent model for the shape of the universe and the distribution of stars, galaxies and clusters within it. The shape has a feature that is commonly referred to as metric expansion.
If this "metric expansion" does not fit with the meaning that you intuitively expect for "expanding universe" then that is not a problem with the idea of "metric expansion". The problem is with your non-standard interpretation of the meaning of the phrase.