I thought I made this very clear in my prior post. He has used assumptions of spacific symmetries from which his derivation is correct.

But his results do not apply to any set of numbers. Only to sets that agree with his assumptions.

He has not made a mathematical error. His error is to claim that it applies to any set of numbers. Suppose we choose for our set the number one. That qualifies as any set of numbers. Can you show me how his fundamental equation follows from that set?