[RevRal]

Ha! I started reading your comment, and I said to myself: "hey, this sounds like human_v2." Nice to see you around :)

So, are you saying that the rote structure of nuanced math is too complicated for it to be accurate or meaningful? I'm sure you're familiar with reductionism (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Reductionism). Just imagine that mechanical duck as math.

One possible reason that we have not yet found "that one fundamental" thing in math is that our universe itself probably isn't a perpetual machine on its own (or, what we can perceive as our universe). So, there is a good chance that it is physically impossible for us to get to where you want us to be with our understanding of math. We wont know until we reach the singularity. But even then....

Anyway, my criticism of math has been that it has been getting far too philosophical. But, I am an amateur.