These two statements make zero sense due to the fact that they are contradicting themselves. I have only claimed that Bitcoin can not catch up to Visa with on chain transactions due to the infficient way of scaling decentralized systems (in comparison to centralized). I have no idea what kind of math you're talking about here nor how it is relevant to this statement.
There is nothing contradictory. You can exceed all transactions globally (the accumulated credit card, bank transfers, paypal payments, cash transactions etc) but you can still be more inefficient than banks or visa.
Maths = the ever increasing technological capabilities.
Perhaps the following example is better: Say Satoshi came along and deployed BTC in 1995, the era of Pentium 100 MHz, 16MB ram, 2 GB hard drives and network speeds that were very slow over the globe. My web/ftp speeds back then were like 1.2kb/sec on my 14.4k modem on non-peak hours.
How many tx/s could that bitcoin network do, with the means of 1995?
Fast forward 2015, how many?
Fast forward 2035, how many?
Fast forward 2055, how many?
So, it's not a matter of if, only a matter of when. Time is what makes the impossible => possible. Even with an inefficient method. Technology compensates for the inefficiency.