I think characterizing duality in this way is kind of superfluous, because the only way all those meanings of duality are the same is in the most abstract sense of the word.
In other words, lots of things have duals. But the duality between any given pair of things doesn't necessarily expose any deep, fundamental connection to another pair of things which have duality. So it's not that duality features so heavily throughout mathematics as its own concept; rather, we frequently build new theories to tie these things together. It's helpful to be able to translate things from one context to another context.
We could just as easily say that isomorphisms are insane because they feature heavily throughout mathematics. But I don't think that provides a deep insight, because it's not like an isomorphism is a special property that ties a bunch of mathematics together in a grand way. Specific pairs of things can be isomorphic. Likewise specific pairs of things can be duals.
Any given pair of dual things is its own duality. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the way another pair of objects is in duality. The terminology here is semantically convenient for intuition, but it's definitely overloaded. I think the commonalities you're seeing here are simply due to the vast utility of linearity in all of those disciplines.
It will increase, which I guess is sort of my point. We already know there's a lot of abstraction. If these things are only alike semantically (two pairs of dual things can be completely unrelated), what does it gain you to point out they've everywhere?
I don't mean to be obtuse, but it strikes me as saying that a city is full of concrete.
In other words, lots of things have duals. But the duality between any given pair of things doesn't necessarily expose any deep, fundamental connection to another pair of things which have duality. So it's not that duality features so heavily throughout mathematics as its own concept; rather, we frequently build new theories to tie these things together. It's helpful to be able to translate things from one context to another context.
We could just as easily say that isomorphisms are insane because they feature heavily throughout mathematics. But I don't think that provides a deep insight, because it's not like an isomorphism is a special property that ties a bunch of mathematics together in a grand way. Specific pairs of things can be isomorphic. Likewise specific pairs of things can be duals.
Any given pair of dual things is its own duality. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the way another pair of objects is in duality. The terminology here is semantically convenient for intuition, but it's definitely overloaded. I think the commonalities you're seeing here are simply due to the vast utility of linearity in all of those disciplines.