To my knowledge, there are very few concrete proposals for what a discrete universe would actually look like. Most physicists believe that the universe should be symmetric under lorentz transforms, which rules out all the obvious ways like splitting the universe into little cubes.
Although discrete models may not exist, discreetness is expected because without there's likely unsolvable informational problems.
This is why Beckenstein was so brilliant, he was among the first to understand physical systems must fit into information theory. If they don't, physics has far worse and profound issues.
Any description of the universe is informational. We should hope that the universe is informational so that humanity can have a complete description of the cosmos. If the universe is not informational, since description by nature is informational, there would be no way to describe the universe completely.
You missed my point. It’s not a thing in a continuous universe. And again, there is no proof whatsoever that ours is not, and we don’t need to invoke any spacetime quantisation to explain any of the current established theories. I am not saying that the universe is not discrete (I just don’t know), but if it’s discrete character we’re this trivial to observe, it would have been settled for a long time.
That's the point. That's why a continuous universe is absurd from an informational perspective.