I am thinking of trying it by way of fusing equations to the logical tautologies (of symbolic logic) any time such binding would be required to avoid a contradiction, or to certify an argument (after all, even Isabelle is a step in that direction).
What "flaws" one might ask? Those pointed out by Gödel in his two theorems, and proven in 1931:
First: "Any effectively generated theory capable of expressing elementary arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete. In particular, for any consistent, effectively generated formal theory that proves certain basic arithmetic truths, there is an arithmetical statement that is true, but not provable in the theory."(Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems). This whole issue is brought up in the context of Tenet 3(b), which indicates that in order to survive in this cosmos, species who live on habitable planets near central stars must develop spacecraft that can travel at or near the speed of light.
Second: "For any formal effectively generated theory T including basic arithmetical truths and also certain truths about formal provability, T includes a statement of its own consistency if and only if T is inconsistent."
Currently we cannot travel at the speed of light, or even anywhere near that speed, even though it will be required for our species to survive in this cosmos according to Tenet 3(b). Maybe understanding the nature of gravity will be a solution.
Light travels at about 670,618,800 miles an hour (186,283 miles per second x 60 x 60), but our spacecraft at optimum speed (helped by gravity, not simply pushed by their own engines) get about 30,000 or so miles per hour.
Thus light travels about 22,354 times faster than our spacecraft do. For each light-year a distant habitable planet is from us, it will take us about 22,354 years, at our current "speed", to get there.
A planet at 50 light years distance from us would take us about a million years of travel to reach.
Kepler is looking for habitable orbs "up to 500 light-years away from the Sun".
Do you get my drift? If not, you will not need to worry about it.
Thus, "a new physics" (better understanding and better technology) will be required for our species to survive the cosmos we live in.
That new physics must be better than our current physics, which is based upon flawed formal equations, and that new physics must be safe at any speed.
Ladies and gentlemen, create then start your engines.