Hempel revisited

Jammer says his concept of a theory (a theory of a theory? ) is in line with Hempel; Jammer postulates C, E, and M - Hempel does mention this 'trope', but not to approve it - where E is a "bottom up" mapping of C to empirical results, and M is a " top down" model. Jammer also proposes "explanatory statements". This seems attractive for physics (relativity = Lorentz, Mitchelson-Morley, c as a constant, curved space) but how's it going to work for, say, biology? And even if it's right that a calculus can be constructed sufficiently abstractly to escape Hempel's objections, those same objections re-surface in E because E is (generally, inevitably? ) framed in T-1