My discovery about mathematics

Supplement.
1. The mathematics treating a countable set isn't consistent by theorem 5.
You can prove any conjecture in it. Let's prove Riemann hypothesis(RH).
Let p₁=2,p₂=3,… be the prime numbers. Add only the term
P={p₁}∪{p₂}∪…(infinitely) to the usual language.
Set up X by this language.
Put Y=X∪{d⊂P}∪{z(a) is a meromorphic function on C.}∪
{∀x((x∈C)∧(Re x ≥1.5)→(z(x)=∏_p∈d1/(1-1/p^x))}∪
{∀x((x∈C)∧(z(x)=0)→(Im x =0)∨(Re x =1/2))}.
Y∪{p₁∈d}∪…∪{p_m∈d} has a model M_m for which
M_m |= d={p₁}∪…∪{p_m} and is consistent for ∀m∈N. So
Y∪{p₁∈d}∪{p₂∈d}∪…(infinitely) is consistent and has a model M.
M is a model of X. M |= d=P={p₁}∪{p₂}∪…(infinitely),
M |= ∀x(z(x)=ζ(x)), M |= (RH) If X |- ¬(RH), M |= ¬(RH). This is contradiction.
You never find exceptions to (RH) by concrete calculations. This means (RH) is true.
2. For x₁∋x₂∋…(infinitely), {x₁}∪{x₂}∪…(infinitely) is countable and isn't a set.
The axiom of regularity is useless.