Your claim is still rubissh, as you neglected to interact with the rest of my comment: economic utility does not necessitate all mathematical output directly contributes.
You redefine "forgot" to make it falsiable, but also neglect that you need to refute that some "forgotten" work didn't contribute to new work down the line.
You redefine "forgot" to make it falsiable, but also neglect that you need to refute that some "forgotten" work didn't contribute to new work down the line.