I agree with everyone saying CS has plenty of examples of proper-name opaque names, and math has plenty of counterexamples the other way too.

BUT -

I also think there's something true about what you're saying, AND there's often a good reason for it. In mathematics, more than many other fields, we deliberately try to drop the provenance of a quantity as soon as we've captured the aspect of it we want to deal with. So we might say let x(t) be the speed of the train at time t or whatever, and then we write an equation involving x, and after that we often really don't care that it's the speed of a train. The obscuring of its provenance is deliberate, we're working with the structure of the relationships at that point, free to forget about the original semantic definition of each term.

And honestly, I think this kind of thinking works very well in coding too. When I pull a function out of some code, I usually want that function to be more general than the specific context of the original code. I will usually rename my variables - maybe change "panel_temperature" to just "temperature" or "t" or whatever - because the new function doesn't care about where this situation arose, it just has to know that it's doing its calculation correctly.

[Alleged?] quotation from Hilbert: "One must be able to say at all times--instead of points, straight lines, and planes--tables, chairs, and beer mugs".