  We assume that the current mathematical knowledge $K$ is a finite set of
statements from both formal and constructive mathematics, which is
time-dependent and publicly available. Any formal theorem of any mathematician
from past or present forever belongs to $K$. Let $T$ denote the set of twin
primes. The true statement "There is no known constructively defined integer
$n$ such that ${\rm card}(T)<\omega \Rightarrow T \subseteq (-\infty,n]$" is
not formal, belongs to $K$, and may not belong to $K$ in the future. The true
statement "There exists a set $X \subseteq \{1,\ldots,49\}$ such that ${\rm
card}(X)=6$ and $X$ never occurred as the winning six numbers in the Polish
Lotto lottery" refers to the current non-mathematical knowledge and does not
belong to $K$. The set $K$ exists only theoretically. Ignoring $K$ and its
subsets, sets exist formally in $ZFC$ theory although their properties can be
time-dependent (when they depend on $K$) or informal. In every branch of
mathematics, the set of all knowable truths is the set of all theorems. This
set exists independently of $K$. Algorithms always terminate. We explain the
distinction between algorithms whose existence is provable in $ZFC$ and
constructively defined algorithms which are currently known. By using this
distinction, we obtain non-trivially true statements on decidable sets $X
\subseteq \mathbb{N}$ that belong to constructive and informal mathematics and
refer to the current mathematical knowledge on $X$. This and the next sentence
justify the article title. The current knowledge in any empirical discipline is
the whole discipline because truths from the empirical sciences are not
necessary truths but working models of truth about particular real phenomena.
