Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)

[GrandizerII]

Ok ...

So back to space pixies, what is it about postulating space pixies that makes it a theory?

Simply that their purpose is to explain the phenomenon of gravity. Its similar to how the atomic theory was proposed as an explanation for things like the law of conservation of mass. We might not know anything about atoms back then, the way we don't know anything about space pixies now, but they play a similar explanatory roll.

More studying for you to do:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_theory

Note at what point it became a theory.

If the theory of space pixies was any clearer, testable hypotheses could be drawn from it. Scientists propose hypothetical particles, structures, and processses all the time that are no different from space pixies. That's all we need to able to begin the testing process. Theories are tools for uncovering reality, it doesn't matter if they themselves are real.

That's a big if there, bud. If X had all the characteristic of being a theory, it would be a theory. No shit.