Frank Kogan

physics does a better job of talking about electrons than music critics do of talking about t.A.T.u. and the Veronicas

See again, you have this focus on talking about electrons as if doing so was a good in and of itself, when my whole position is that I don;t give a shit about electrons except insofar as they are useful conceptual tools that allow humans to achieve cool shit, such as, for one example, allowing me to argue the merits of t.A.T.u vs. the Veronicas over the internet, which would not have been achieved without the precision conceptual tool of quantum mechanics' description of electrons.

The point of physics is engineering, just as the point of biology is stuff like medicine.

The point of a precision science of music would be to make better music! And your last paragraph does indeed hint at possible pathways as to how one could do so in the future.

But even a precision science of music criticism could help make better music - I'm sure most music critics would agree, or at least would hope, that in some way good music criticism would lead to better music being made.

What would a more "scientific" music criticism look like? Simply, attention to the production of theories, the making of predictions based on said theories, carrying out experiments based on said predictions, and then the modification of theory based on the results of experiment.

In short, music criticism that directly informs music practice.

I would contend that something very like this actually goes on already! You could even view genres as Kuhnian paradigms, perhaps....