I don't think this really addresses my objections. The fact that physics is described mathematically could be an artefact of how mathematics is the most "agreea

I don't think this really addresses my objections. The fact that physics is described mathematically could be an artefact of how mathematics is the most "agreeable" way for humans to come to a consensus. It seems to me inescapable that mathematics is inherently anthropocentric. I think this is a false dichotomy: > ...either everything in physics will always be rooted in math, or else some "non-math stuff" has to be discovered. I can imagine a plethora of other possibilities. For example, there may be nothing "at the root " of reality, no ultimate equations. We might get better and better at predicting and manipulating the universe around us, but never close down on some ultimate truth.