But the human science of physics does not cover all possible physical laws. It does not cover the laws of matter as they relate to living things. I suppose it could in principle, but in practice it doesn't. The laws of matter for living things are a superset which include the laws that physicists study, but add properties that emerge in the more complex structures of living things.
I think we can agree in principle that there is more going on in biological systems than the physical laws, known today, can address.
But when it comes to the terms "physical law" and "matter" we are up against very specific definitions in Physics which are not likely to change. Hence I doubt that any explanation for these other properties will make it any further than "theory" or will conflict with the properties attributed to "matter" by physicists. But that's fine - after all, relativity is and will likely always be, a "theory" too.
IMHO, with all these mathematicians and physicists at the table with the evolution biologists, a comprehensive and widely accepted theory ought to be forthcoming.
I'm tickled pink that you recognize this difference in biological systems and are willing to discuss it, js1138! Thank you!!!