Refutation according to Karl Popper

Hello,
According to Karl Popper, a theory is considered scientific only when it can be subjected to the test of refutation.
In one of the columns, you talked about "Platonic" scientific theories – scientific theories that do not discuss the physical world in and of themselves, but rather discuss an imaginary world in which there are no additional forces at work. You argued that in order to make predictions about the physical world, you need to combine several "Platonic" scientific theories.
My question is, are "Platonic" scientific theories considered scientific according to Popper? How can a "Platonic" scientific theory be refuted?
For example, gravity. Even if there are two objects that do not approach each other, it can still be argued that in a "platonic" way they are attracted to each other, but there is another force in the world (whether we know it or not) that pulls one of the objects in the other direction.