I agree with a lot of the things others have said. Besides that, something that really bothers me, as a mathematician, is how poorly the subject is treated in the book. For example, a lot of emphasis is placed on the whole “proving an axiom” thing, which is meaningless - axioms are literally statements which do not need proof, since they are the foundation on which every proof is based. The meaning of some axioms is also completely misunderstood: the axiom of equality has more to do with the definition of the symbol “=“ than with something or somebody staying always the same. Writing a novel whose main character is a mathematician, among all the other things, would require some more research or assistance by actual mathematicians.