From my university course on the history of science I remember that people like Descartes and Bacon laid the foundation for physics and other modern sciences with their philosophical theories.
I've found sources on the internet that seem to confirm that I do not remember that incorrectly, however was it a necessary prerequirement for science or more something developed alongside?
Personally, I'm leaning towards the former, since it seems to me that you do need philosophy to develop your scientific method first, but I've seen people who deny that, and I've been struggling to find convincing argument as to why that would be the case, so that's why I wanted to ask here how important the development of philosophy was for the modern (natural) sciences and if it's accurate to say they emerged from the former. Thanks in advance for all answers!
The connection between abstract philosophical theories and the development of science is often overstated. Check out these two books on how early developments in modern science came about:
Edit: You might also find this interesting, if you want to venture a little earlier in the development of natural sciences: Possessing Nature, by Paula Findlen. Also good is Kuhn's philosophical/historical description of science, which does not require that scientists themselves engage with philosophical ideas: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.