Notes on Sean Carroll's Argument on Physics and Materialism

Introduction

Host: Emerson Green.
Discussing Sean Carroll's arguments regarding materialism and physics.
Main premise: Laws of physics underlying everyday life are completely understood.

Carroll claims that everyday life operates under completely understood physical laws.
He has addressed this in various platforms (blog posts, lectures, papers).
Dramatic Claim: "The laws underlying the physics of everyday life are completely understood."
- Macroscopic objects are comprised of atoms; their behavior is governed by known forces.
"No experiment ever done here on Earth has contradicted this model" - supports his claim on the understanding of physics.

Atoms behave consistently across different contexts (e.g., in a rock vs. in a human heart).
Carroll argues that there is no room for immaterial or supernatural explanations (e.g., souls, psychokinesis).
Higher confidence in materialism based on the empirical success of the core theory of physics.

"Electrons obey the same equations of motion regardless of their context."
Argument against dualism and parapsychological claims due to the consistency required by atoms and forces in a materialist framework.

Carroll's framework includes:
- Core theory (standard model of particle physics + general relativity).
- Each EFT model specifies its domain of applicability.
- Successful in explicitly understanding everyday life physics (e.g., biology, chemistry).
Existing laws of physics relevant to atom behavior imply no additional forces or laws can impact them significantly.

Recognizes that not all laws are understood (e.g., quantum gravity, black holes).
Emphasizes that while physics is not complete, the foundational understanding of physics relevant to atoms is sufficient to dismiss non-physical explanations.

Carroll discusses Weak Emergence vs. Strong Emergence:
- Weak Emergence: Compatible with reductionism; higher-level theories emerge from lower-level entities.
- Strong Emergence: Antithetical; posits that new entities or forces arise that cannot be predicted from lower-level behaviors.
Carroll supports weak emergence, asserting that natural phenomena can be described at various levels without contradicting lower-level laws.

Thermodynamics vs. Kinetic Theory: Different valid theories applicable in different domains, without requiring addition of new forces.
Free Will might be seen as real in higher-level theories (human behavior) but not captured in basic physical laws.

Challenge: His experimental evidence does not sufficiently support micro-reductionism.
Strong emergence could exist which aligns with emerging natural laws in complex systems beyond current particle tests.
Conservation of energy must be scrutinized against strong emergence concepts.

"The success of core theory does not rule out the possibility of strong emergence": Carroll concedes that new laws may apply at higher levels of organization (biological complexities).
Experimental limitations in testing complex biological systems suggest evidence supporting strong emergence has not been observed yet.

Emphasizes nuanced understanding and debate between material existence and potential emergent properties.
Recommitment to ongoing examination of physical laws and emergent characteristics in complex systems.

Sean Carroll argues for a complete understanding of everyday physics and dismisses non-physical claims regarding consciousness, using effective field theory as a basis.
He grapples with the concept of emergence, ultimately supporting a nuanced view that allows for complexity at higher levels.
Ongoing exploration is warranted, and strong emergence remains a significant topic for future investigation.