Except... Math is a tool, and a tool can make everything look correct and then still incorporate a flaw. A tool captures reality, per the tool. It does not capture reality itself.
The simple example how a tool can fool us is done with pen and paper as tools. Draw a beautiful face on it, with all parts of the face absolutely correct, but then with just a single eye.
A child will already recognize that a Cyclops is unnatural/incorrect. I hope you see that I picked an example that is obvious for all to see. As quick side note, I like how you need S and K, and not just one (i.e. two eyes). But then you meld things back to one once more.
The Cyclops is easy to see as artificial. It is much harder to see how mathematics can establish a cyclopic aspect. When there are, for instance, twenty mathematical calculations written down on the blackboard to show how a Black Hole exists, then it is much harder to see the cyclopic aspect.
All twenty mathematical calculations are correct, yet in combination a flaw occurred, and that flaw can go unnoticed.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387727429_On_Making_Scientific_Mistakes
The problem occurs when physicists use mathematics and encounter a zero outcome. The value of zero is fully taken out of the equation. You are doing that, too, because that is what you learned to do in this tool.
Instead of placing the empty value in the center, a maximum of an unnatural proportion is placed in the center.
The Black Hole is declared to have a mass of such proportions that it collapsed onto itself and hides behind an event horizon.
A child can see that this is incorrect, but the twenty mathematical calculations are all correct by themselves. So, the problem needs to be recognized and folks do not see the flaw when all calculations by themselves are correct.
It is the Monty Hall problem in which a person sees one truth, hangs on to it, and therefore fails to see the larger truth because the smaller truth cannot be let go.
In your case, you accepted the TOE as possible, and then you found the pathway. You closed an eye, and found the perfect outcome. Too bad it is a cyclopic outcome. You are working inside a tool and you did not see that you eliminated a position declared as having an outcome of zero itself.
That is like saying that when there are three people in three chairs, and one gets up and walks away, then there are just two people sitting in chairs left. The answer ends up being an incompleteness, an accuracy that does no longer point to the bigger truth.
Nice work though. You are a smart person. I hope you'll investigate the Monty Hall problem and recognize that the brain can err with all the parts pronounced correctly when one aspect is removed that should not have been removed.
