Our math may only be sufficiently correlated with scientific results to maintain consistency . Things are overturned in science from time to time and our view of things is readjusted to stay correlated . We may just have sufficiently abstract axioms to allow for the ability to consistently explain the ambiguity and thus sufficiently abstract to communicate changes in that ambiguity from one result to another . Anything with no real world application can only be proven consistent within itself , and anything that happens in the real world can be effectively communicated via language . Math is a universal language , but there ' s nothing to imply it exists with or without the universe . if it does it wouldnt be inconsistent , but I don ' t feel that ' s sufficient enough to claim an existential independence from linguistic language