Sort of but I think you're too limiting on the scope of what theory can do. Usually in engineering you can't just design anything in your imagination. You have a limited set. A domain. Which to continue the theme of the example, I have a set of points. I rarely have all the points on the face of the earth.
How do I pick the point such that it minimizes a specification constraint? Let's say that constraint is the shortest distance. This is design by calculation.
Then design is out of the equation. But if the specification constrains is "The two points most pleasing to the user" Then you can "design" those points.
If I had access to every neuron and had a exact fully realized mathematical model of the general human brain, even this constraint of "pleasing" and "usability", in theory could be met with a calculation.
Largely anything that leans more towards "design" means we don't know shit about what's going on so we hire philosophers and artists to make wild guesses. That is essentially what design is: a wild guess.
The more of software we can model in a theory, the less wild guesses we need.
How do I pick the point such that it minimizes a specification constraint? Let's say that constraint is the shortest distance. This is design by calculation.
Then design is out of the equation. But if the specification constrains is "The two points most pleasing to the user" Then you can "design" those points.
If I had access to every neuron and had a exact fully realized mathematical model of the general human brain, even this constraint of "pleasing" and "usability", in theory could be met with a calculation.
Largely anything that leans more towards "design" means we don't know shit about what's going on so we hire philosophers and artists to make wild guesses. That is essentially what design is: a wild guess.
The more of software we can model in a theory, the less wild guesses we need.