EVERYTHING IS CORRECT WITH MATH
I like math. You can describe anything you want with it.
Think about all the theories in physics that are opposite or oppose each other.
They all use intricate, exacting math equations to describe the theory in question.
But since we can be sure only one theory has a slight chance of being be correct, that means all the rest are flat out wrong and at least 90% of the math used is describing nothing more than a fantasy (or a cranky theory).

Got it? Even if you can back up your theory with math - it doesn't mean a thing.

You can make anything appear correct using math.

Yes, that is the problem.
Dummies come up with wacky math equations then try to make the Universe fit it.
Then simpletons who understand the math are fooled into thinking it is correct because they understand it.
It should be the other way around - get a good idea of what is really going on then formulate some math equation and see if it also fits mathematically. But that's the original problem, you can make anything seem correct mathematically.

So what is the real problem?
That's easy, idiots are (and always were) the problem.
And remember... Math does not describe reality.  

Math does not describe reality.

If you have an equation for a sphere, it is mapping out a solid sphere...
Nothing is Solid (except something like a neutron star, protons and neutrons are supposedly solid but they might just have a very loose thread pack)
A "reality" math would be based on threads and commandeering sections of space.
In a 3-D world (only XYZ axis) a 1 x 1 x 1 cube would look like picture below.

The 3-D axis shape on the left is actually the thread cube. The amount of space it commandeers is the cubic region on the right. Remember... Nothing is solid.

The graphic below would be a "reality" 2-D plane. It would be made of only the XY axis particles (threads) attached together.
Any masses in the thread network will of course have / develop more connections and pull together.
NOTE: The mass(es) in this scenario / instance would be balled up XY axis threads. Everything is the same construct.

The "field lines" (actually thread tethers) from any mass (atoms molecules) will go off in every direction but of course two masses in proximity will have a stronger tension between them than the thread network tension coming from infinity.
 
NOTE: This does not mean that all math is wrong.
How fast is a car traveling? That's easy, meters per second, and m / s is absolutely correct.
But things with a volume in them... technically nothing is solid so the answers you get are not even in the ballpark.

Dimensions...
........mass = [M] = kilograms
......length = [L] = meters
........time = [T] = seconds
...frequency = [T^-1] = seconds ^-1
.......speed = [L]/[T] ...... = m / s
acceleration = [L]/[T^2] .... = m / s^2
....momentum = [M][L]/[T] ... = kg_m / s
.......force = [M][L]/[T^2] . = kg_m / s^2
......energy = [M][L^2]/[T^2] = kg_m^2 / s^2

The one inch equation below is acceptable (defines actual reality) even though it is using regular math because it is actually a thread tension equation (non-solid).
Notice there is no width. And the mass used is the theoretical mass of a 1-D electron thread.

NOTE: The " T " in the equation... TL = mc^2 ...below is tension and that's a force.
NOTE: The [T]'s inside brackets below are [time]

Tension * Length = mass * speed of light squared = Energy
 
 TL = mc^2
|--inch--|

tension [M][L]/[T^2] * length [L] = mass [M] * speed c^2 [L^2]/[T^2]