Numbers would definitely help. Numbers are a language, like language is a language, and it has its own rules and grammatical system and just like you can tell someone to do something for you and they do it, you can create a computer and tell it to do something in number language and the computer will do it.
But I have a bias: I tend to believe in embodied cognition. That is, everything we know (including mathematics) is build upon analogy after analogy, where 1=the toy we put in our mouth, 2 is the toy we grab with our left hand and 3 is the toy we grab with our right hand. [four we grab with our feet]. And.. that’s about it. quadratic math.
We get *totally* baffled by stuff beyond quadratic. Analogies built on analogies.
I just made that up about the toys. But it gets the ‘gist’ of the idea
I think https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_theory has the best hope over Sets for a more complete mathematics.. .but even there, until its self-referential to the people who are writing it and the people who are using it, and the machines that process it, no mathematics will be complete.