Maybe not in your view, but if not, that would be a shame, because it then no longer aligns with physics. I am inclined to think economists, including those subscribing to the arguments of Austrian economics would prefer it at least to align with physics.
Otherwise, if we went with your view that I have this wrong, we would stay in the world of Enshittopia, with the planet forever heating, forever desertifying, never understanding why physical reality, and energy isn't arguable.
This is how energy works, and money is abstracted energy, always, physically.
Failure to understand this is failure to understand why nature is forcing the devaluation of money now, ultimately to zero, no arguments, until it is issued to reflect the only energy scaling up, whilst all the other energy sources scale down.
Here is the proof, you are more than welcome to comment on that, and say where you think it might be incorrect:
