So, I asked ChatGPT, an ontological question about "fields" (electromagneti c, gravitational, etc.) : "can we reasonably assume the fields in physics exist because of their effects but we cannot explain nor describe what they are?"

ChatGPT: "while we can describe and predict the behavior of electromagnetic fields very accurately, the question of what they truly "are" on a fundamental level is a philosophical and theoretical aspect that remains open to exploration and interpretation. This is a common theme in theoretical physics, where models and equations can effectively describe phenomena without providing a complete picture of the underlying reality."

IOW, physics, mathematics, and some theories can be used to make calculations and accurate predictions about phenomena but are not necessarily an actual definition of REALITY. They give us a way to answer HOW but not WHAT and WHY.

IMO, this is one of the greatest logical fallacies most scientists are too blind to see, HOW ≠ WHAT or WHY.