But if there were clear answers to all problems, then there would be no point to scientific inquiry. I think this statement misrepresents the real process that is Science. For example, ghosts and angels are not included in scientific theories. Gravity is real. The descriptions of its behavior by Newton and Einstein are still both theories.
Light is real.
Just say it that way. The scientist attaches a good deal more certainty to the term than does the man in the street. My intent was to point out that explanations of the phenomena of light are more certain than untested hypotheses, but they are not laws in the same sense as Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion. Even though only one is ultimately correct, scientists point to test results or observations that support their divergent theories. But there cannot be conflicting physical laws.