You're right. But consider this: the geocentric model perfectly predicted planetary positions for centuries, and it was certainly useful. But could we say it was the essence of the universe? In the end, it's a useful model within limited cognition, but whether it's 'fundamental' is a separate question.

I think the key is that different phenomena require different approaches, and even if you interpret a single phenomenon through multiple mental models, none of them necessarily captures its essence. Ultimately, it's about which mental model is shared by a 'group'—not about what's fundamentally true.

We currently share the model of computation, but whether that makes it fundamental is a different story.

As a programmer, I'd put it this way: no matter how well an API describes the backend, the backend itself is not the API.

Here, the API is human knowledge, and the backend is the world