"Are you saying that since we can't see the behavior of elementary particles, that we attribute their behavior to natural laws we can see?"
Instead of a yes or no, I will try to explain my view:
The expression "Natural Laws" has something in common with the expression "Natural gas". Just hearing the naturalness of it gives us a positive bias.
It is very tempting to mix up "natural laws" deduced from experiments with the hidden mechanisms that is the true source of the particles behaviour. If we want to make a leap in our understanding of the universe, like the leap from Newton to Einstein, we cannot stand on Einsteins shoulders and jump to the next level. Einstein did not stand on Newtons when he took his leap. He used the old data, but not the old interpretations of it.
I wrote my short essay in the last hours before the deadline of the contest. So some things could have been explained clearer.
I am a son of the information age, so I am biased towards an information oriented perspective on the universe. For example, I believe the distance between particles is an expression of the gravity/time-difference between them. Empty space is not a scene on with the particles do their thing. Empty space does not exist, It only looks that way because particles appears to be far away, because we have a weak relation to them.