IMHO that interpretation is implausible. "... [theory] doesn't replace, rather [[its creator] provided it for free]"? makes no sense. It doesn't replace, rathe

IMHO that interpretation is implausible. "... [theory] doesn't replace, rather [[its creator] provided it for free]"? makes no sense. It doesn't replace, rather complements it. Occam's razor AND semantics. Edit: maybe you were joking? in which case sorry (it missed the mark)