The problem is that while there are perspectives all over the spectrum, it is that the core ideas, theories, beliefs tend to become sacrosanct and there is that centripetal dynamic.

Consider my observation about galaxies as energy radiating out, while the structure being manifest coalesces in. Anything actually falling into the black holes is shot out the poles as quasars, which are like giant lasers and lasers are synchronized light waves.

So it goes to the old saying in science, that change happens one funeral at a time. We learn from the prior generation, as they learned from theirs and if you want to get ahead, you can't really question core theories, but do so by finding ever more effective patches to hold them together. Creating these edifices that suddenly collapse, because they couldn't be falsified, only patched.

For example, math is modeling, yet these models are often considered foundational, rather than just abstractions.

Epicycles were brilliant math, as a model of our view of the cosmos, but when they tried extrapolating physical explanations from them, it went off the rails.

Here is an interview from many years ago, with one Carver Mead, who among many accomplishments, did the math behind Moore's law, predicting the growth of computer processing;

https://worrydream.com/refs/Mead_2001_-_Interview_(American_Spectator).html

Among various observations, he argues it's all waves, all the way down. Particles are just artifacts of observation.

"During a lifetime in the trenches of the semiconductor industry, Mead developed a growing uneasiness about the "standard model" that supposedly governed his field. Mead did not see his electrons and photons as random or incoherent. He regarded the concept of the "point particle" as an otiose legacy from the classical era. Early photodetectors or Geiger counters may have provided both visual and auditory testimony that photons were point particles, but the particulate click coarsely concealed a measurable wave."