I like the direction you're headed in.

However, note: no theory can be 'absolutely proven' until you have absolute knowledge, and that's not feasible. There may always be a case where some new factor comes into play, and the theory needs to be modified. Even if something is proven 1000 times, it's inherently not absolute, because 'proven' simply refers to reaching a certain threshold of evidence.

When we have enough evidence, we hold something to be proven, but that doesn't mean its absolute.

When a theory is proven, it then becomes 'truth'. We hold it to be true.

In this entire area of thought, I think it's valuable to recognize that all these things hinge on a deliberate choice made by people. We choose to accept something as true because it reaches the threshold of evidence we require. We consider a theory to be proven, because we make a deliberate choice to recognize it as such because it satisfies our criteria.

Same with how we approach 'reality'. We need to recognize that a) each of us has a 'map' of reality - that is, our conceptualization of what 'reality' is, and that b) the map is not the territory. How we see or understand reality is not reality itself.

Ideally, we aspire to our map or concept of reality being accurate and representing reality as closely as possible, but it's important in some areas to remember that our conception of reality and reality itself are two separate things.