In QM for example, I realize it is pointless to try and picture what is happening because the is nothing macroscopic to base it on. In GR, we are told that something called space-time is curved which creates the phenomenon of gravitational force. The deeper you go into these subjects, however, it seems that the simple explanation is never the case. Am I right in saying that gravity really isn't the warping of something called space-time, but it is helpful to think of it in that way in order to predict certain outcomes in our macroscopic world? If that's what modern science is all about, being able to predict certain outcomes in our macroscopic world, then what is the point of ascribing these pictures when fundamentally, that is not what's going on (other than to help the general public who have no intentions of further study). From what I've gathered, a modern working theoretical physicist tries to formulate mathematics to predict the macroscopic outcomes of experiments that could be performed. That's great, but it really doesn't tell us exactly what's physically going on, and our unaided human brains probably could never understand what's going on, unless it involved simple Newtonian dynamics. Is that somewhat accurate?