Isn't that just what neural networks do? The way light falls on an object is physically deterministic, but the neural network in the brain of a human painter doesn't actually calculate rays to determine where highlights should be. A center fielder knows where to run to catch a fly ball without having to understand the physics acting on it. Similarly, we can spot things that look wrong, not because we're refering to physical math but because we have endless kludged-together rules that supercede other rules. Like: Heavy objects don't float. Except for boats which do float. Except for boats that are leaking, which don't. To then explain why something is happening we refer to specialized models, and these image generation models are too general for that, but there's no reason they couldn't refer to separate physical models to assist their output in the future.