Since truth is a relationship and a direction, the generalized relationship must be mathematical in order for intellect to articulate generalized statements.  When the relationship is experimentally mathematical, it identifies with  physical Universe, which presents physical verifiable data. Generalized laws govern Universe. Generalized statements of the eternal generalized laws govern all science.  To each of us Universe must be all that is including the observer who articulates the discoverable truths which tend to articulate generalized principles. Synergetics 505.51 and 504.13

The term ‘data’ is the plural of ‘datum’. Still, it confuses most of us because we are unaccustomed to fact-finding and concerns about statistics which is what data is used for in respect to a reference or analysis.  But we reference everything observed anyway to some previous experience.  Perhaps we also casually consider the observation and the articulation but in retrospect wonder about the interrelating elements and with more knowledge we can be concerned  about the structural integrity of the information experience.  Sometimes we accept it as the truth, no questions asked.  

Oxford University Press Dictionary lists data as collected in quantities, notably as characters or symbols on which operations are performed.  The performance is by a computer.  So without any great fanfare the mathematical experimental relationship always concerns the truth, not that we are actually performing mathematical problems and analyzing mathematical solutions expected to know about abstract mathematical terms.  Even though intellect is observing the reenacting articulations.  It can be each time consciously hoping to reduce the tolerance magnitude of the residual inaccuracies of it when omnirationally resetting the world stage.

Verifiable data naturally would include relevant variables that in turn provide to our individual consciousness evolution time-related events that are conceptual. The generalized events refer to the minimum limit case.  In vectorial geometry the minimum limit case comprises not less than three vectors of a positive action-reaction-resultant semi-helix and a negative action-reaction-resultant tripartite that combine as six vectors. The six vectors describe one tetrahedron, one energy quantum, as a conceptuality of the minimum thinkable set.

What purpose would it serve to discredit awareness of the minimum limit case?  I ask, since the discovery of it coincides with awareness of nature’s coordinate system as a conceptuality of Universe’s generalized principles.  This is because each vector is metaphysically theoretical and physically realized.  Its mass times its velocity equals zero.   Recalling Energy Quanta Accounting (EQA) & (EPA) Synergetics 935.25 and Synergetics 526.19: Mass x Velocity = Energy package; Mass x Velocity = Zero, V = Vector; V2 = Energy Package’s surface (This is a superscript notation where the 2 is an exponent, as in 2 to the 2nd power); Energy Quanta Modules, (EQM) in Synergetics Vectorial Geometry: Synergetics 1106.23 and Synergetics 1052.33.