It is now generally recognized that physics has not been contributing anything conceptually fundamentally new beyond the century old Relativity and 90 years old Quantum Mechanics [1-4]. We have also started recognizing that there is an increasing rate of species extinction all over the world, especially since the last century ; and we are beginning to understand that the related problems are being steadily accelerated by human behavior to conquer nature, rather than understanding nature as is and living within its system logics [6,7]. We are beginning to appreciate that our long-term sustainability as a species literally depends upon proactively learning to nurture the entire bio-diversity [8-10]. Thus, humans must consciously become evolution process congruent thinkers. The evolutionary biologists have been crying out loud for us to listen [5,6, 8-10]. Social scientists, political scientists, economic scientists  have started chiming in to become consilient thinkers  for re-constructing sustainable societies. But, the path to consilient thinking requires us to recognize and accept a common vision based thinking process, which functionally serves as a uniting platform. I am articulating that platform as the “evolution process congruent thinking” (EPCT). Do physicists have any obligation to co-opt this EPCT? Is there any immediate and/or long-term gain for them? This paper argues affirmatively that co-opting EPCT is the best way to re-anchor physics back to reality ontology and develop newer and deeper understanding of natural phenomena based on understanding of the diverse interaction processes going on in nature. Physics is mature enough to acknowledge that all of our theories are “work in progress”. This is a good time to start iteratively re-evaluating and re-structuring all the foundational postulates behind all the working theories. This will also consistently energize all the follow-on generation of physicists to keep on fully utilizing their evolution-given enquiring minds without being afraid by the prevailing culture of “publish-or-perish”, requiring them to stay within the bounds of the prevailing theories as the final ones. Current physics thinking has been successfully driven by Measurable Data Modeling Epistemology (MDM-E); which is basically curve-fitting without demanding to understand the actual physical processes nature is carrying out. I am proposing to add an iterative repertoire, Interaction Process mapping Epistemology (IPM-E) over and above successful MDM-E. This will facilitate the physicists to become conceptual reverse engineers of nature. The gap between physicists and engineers will start melting down and our collective sustainability will be re-assured as successful engineers of nature.