Cue sports is a sport that requires sustained solitary performance. There has yet to be a completely effective and all-encompassing "pertubation theory" (CTE, GB, contact points, whatever) that teachers can consciously lecture to their students. The best that teachers can do is explain their own learning process, and perhaps also repeat the learning processes explained to them by other teachers.
One can't teach subconscious micro-thoughts, muscle memory, and mental connections to perspective.
Therefore, any experiment that depends on any element of human-induced variance is questionable.
However, all pertubation theories are similar and boil down to one thing:
"The resulting impact vector upon the face of the cueball"
But, how does someone make a sensor that measures this? Well, you can open up a cue ball and inject a 3-axis accelerometer... but now you need to make sure you restore the moment of inertia and weight back to the original parameters. How do you power it? How do you measure the signals coming from the accelerometer? Maybe Bluetooth, but now you have a larger board to deal with. Maybe instead you can use lasers to measure the ball, or a three dimensional camera, or an array of cameras with customized DSP software. Is all this work even worth doing for a sporting industry that isn't very popular? Golf sure has enough money to do this type of analysis and make a profit, but do we?
Precisely performing an emperical measurement on the impact vector of a cue ball is a complex problem to solve. But if it were done properly, I am confident that all of the proven "aiming systems" will have the exact same measured impact vectors for the same shots.
And the ONLY way to consistently produce the same impact vectors, as a human being, is through practice and experience.
So in conclusion:
Can you directly apply complex math from your head to pool. No.
Is flicking your wrist a different mental concept than pivoting? Yes.
Is there any physical difference between the end results? No.