I’ve edited my last post to be more in line with the definition of theory which the author of Science and Its Limits claims is a relatively popular definition. One thing I’ve noticed though, is that there’s something more foundational to the point that I’m making which I’m not sure I made clear enough in that post, and which I will mention here.
That is that mechanical equations can only inductively infer how matter behaves. But that seems to me to be the extent of what they can infer. To suggest that they can be used to infer what underlies observable physical reality has no logical justification at all that I can see.
The only logical means that I’m aware of to infer such things is through abductive reasoning and the relevant evidence from which to infer such things would be physical observation, not abstract mechanical equations.