No, heavy reliance on circular logic is not the secret behind the success of theoretical physics in passing tests of observations or experiments. The success of theoretical physics in explaining and predicting phenomena is based on rigorous scientific methods and principles, rather than circular reasoning.
Theoretical physics relies on the scientific method, which involves formulating hypotheses, making predictions based on those hypotheses, and testing those predictions through experiments and observations. Theories are constructed by combining existing knowledge, experimental data, and mathematical frameworks in a consistent and logical manner.
The predictions made by theoretical physics are tested through experiments and observations conducted by experimental physicists. These tests are designed to challenge and validate the theoretical predictions or, in some cases, to discover discrepancies that could lead to new insights or refinements of the theories.
The success of theoretical physics in passing tests of observations and experiments is a result of the self-correcting nature of the scientific process. If a theory were based solely on circular logic or flawed reasoning, it would eventually be exposed through experimental evidence that does not match the predictions. In such cases, scientists would revise or discard the theory in favor of more accurate ones that better explain the observed phenomena.
It is important to note that scientific theories are not immutable or absolute truths. They are our best current explanations based on the available evidence and understanding. As new data and experimental techniques become available, theories can be refined, expanded, or replaced by more comprehensive frameworks. This iterative process allows science to continually progress and improve our understanding of the natural world.