May as well address this to both.
There is a qualitative difference in the way math is applied in physics today vs. in the past.
In the past, the applied math had real physical ties to reality.
With the relativity era that all changed. With relativity, one changes reality to match the math. It’s a fundamentally different process than the one used to derive equations from observation in the absence of underlying theory.
Today, the underlying theory is the starting point and observations are both altered and outright fabricated in order to make them match the theory.
Enter the math.
Math reduces the physical world to symbols. However, the symbol is only meaningful when used as an accurate proxy for the physical phenomena underlying it.
Today what we see is a systematic misuse of mathematical symbols in defiance of the physical realities. The presence of infinities, the abuse of time, requirements for extra dimensions, and so on and so forth.
To me, what is disrespectful of the impact of mathematics on astrophysics is not the challenging of the current paradigm, but its uncritical acceptance.
Throw in accelerating institutional corruption and peer review practices of increasingly poor quality, and a cutting edge consisting largely of claims derived from unrepeatable experiments, and what we have here is a false description of the universe on its final legs, as observations continue to blow irreparable holes in the model.
In the big picture, the fundamental problems are even higher level that that, though. The big picture problem is that our conception of the universe derives from an era before electricity. Which is kind of a big deal in terms of how the universe actually operates.
The mechanistic gravity-centric universe has failed just as completely as the geo-centric one. It is time for new conceptions that include from the start the new forces that we now know exist abundantly in creation.
You still haven’t answered a single question I have asked you?