Eh yes and no. "Traditional" engineering professions, ones where you need to get licensed, are all grounded in physics. Software engineering isn't (ignore the fact that bits running on silicon is physics, it's irrelevant). Software engineering is based on best practices and algorithms that are based on...some guy writing them, saying they're good, and others trusting that they're good. There's a million different ways to make something. Million different opinions. Million different cargo cults. It's why making a FE exam for software would be impossible; there's just too many ways to do something and often very little evidence why it's good.

Engineering = Applied Physics.

Software Engineering = Applied Math.

Both are about modelling, so you have a good idea if a solution works before you build it.

If you're gluing stuff together and hoping it's not going to fall apart too often you're not doing either.

And the last piece of the equation:

Applied Physics = Applied Math.

"There's a million different ways to make something. Million different opinions. Million different cargo cults."

So... different tradeoff? Sounds like engineering to me :).

I suppose technically the timing of traffic lights or deciding whether to use a roundabout involves physics in that if you get it wrong, cars bounce off each other, but I'm not sure civil engineering is any more grounded in physics than software engineering is.