Philosophy

I don't know what you mean by "matter without interpretation".
m=e/c2, according as one theory (interpretation). What do you imagine "matter" is?

About the English flags: "The atoms are real, the meaning is imaginary."
Meaning is what we apprehend when we read or hear, and understand, a word or group of words. Apprehension and imagination are different faculties.

"There were humans, but calling them "English" is an opinion or belief."
There were humans speaking the English language. That is objective fact, and your opinion that it is not is just that, your opinion. Although I suppose that you imagine that your opinion becomes, when stated over and over, somehow more valid than contrary ones.

"There was violence."
Yes, that's another description of the events, and the violence was objective fact.

"People were walking on atoms that were grouped in a way that we call dirt, grass, rocks, etc."
Yes, the land being colonized was real, just as were the colonizers. That you want to call that land "atoms" is your predilection but is no more valid than others who call dirt 'dirt'.

"the laws were strictly imaginary"
In my *opinion* you are again misusing the term "imaginary". Reciting a meme. But then, my opinion is just imaginary (right?) and so not real? Not composed of your "atoms"?

"There were humans who moved around and acted violently toward other humans. The rest is imaginary."
What you call "the rest" is comprised of more precise and expansive description.

"The test to determine if something is strictly imaginary is try to determine if that something exists outside of the imagination. If it doesn't, then it is strictly imaginary."
That's all well and good, a tautology. But you misuse your tautological maxim when you conflate apprehension with imagination, when you tout the "reality" of "atoms" but deny the reality of human groupings, of rules for human behavior, and so on.