Sean Carroll on the Higgs

I very much enjoy talks like these about the secrets of nature and Carroll is an excellent communicator and teacher.

Unfortunately I cringe very much when I hear statements such as...

"Quantum Field theory and the Standard model is all we need to describe our every day life"

"The 100% story of your day to day life, everything you have ever felt, heard, seen or otherwise interacted with... is explained by the standard model"

This is not honest from a physicist and a man of science. It sounds either arrogant or pretty stupid... Seems like he's preaching to his choir of "skeptics". Another creepy sign of how science can become religion
C:\Users\Olavi\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.gif

I think he is honest but he is also a believer. His belief is so strong that he is ready to dismiss any evidence menacing his belief. Here more of his claims:

uO3AGqA.png


To claim "No life after death" is foolish because he cannot know it. On the contrary there is very much evidence supporting the possibility of life after death.

He has not learned anything from the history of science. For example from this:
Quotes About Johann Philipp Gustav Von Jolly

Quotes tagged as "johann-philipp-gustav-von-jolly" (showing 1-1 of 1)

“When I began my physical studies [in Munich in 1874] and sought advice from my venerable teacher Philipp von Jolly...he portrayed to me physics as a highly developed, almost fully matured science...Possibly in one or another nook there would perhaps be a dust particle or a small bubble to be examined and classified, but the system as a whole stood there fairly secured, and theoretical physics approached visibly that degree of perfection which, for example, geometry has had already for centuries.”
Max Planck

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/johann-philipp-gustav-von-jolly[/quote]
 
Opinion of how creepy this seems to you put aside, can you show any evidence that hints the standard model is not correct?

It seems you have misunderstood the problem with Carroll. I appreciate the Standard Model and the stronger it is, the better. But we have extremely strong evidence about psi phenomena being a reality, and the SM cannot explain them.

In science valid observations are stronger than theories. Therefore no theory is able to exclude any phenomenon that is beyond its scope.
 
While I agree with the sentiment put in Carroll's exposition ( that the Standard Model is pretty much our best bet so far to understand how reality behaves ), the Standard Model is neither complete nor is the end. We don't have, for example, an explanation for Dark Matter ( and no quantum field or quantum particle of said fields seem to be fit the bill right now), nor we do have a fussion of quantum mechanics and general relativity, or an for neutrinos oscillation, that according to the Standard Model, should be massless ( yet they do have mass!), there is also Muonic Hydrogen, etc, etc.

While I'm a materialist ( so far ), I hold to Chalmers Property Dualism theory of the mind, which I think have a lot of potential for explaining psi, in case it exists.

PD: BTW I'm new, hello to all of you folks!
 
I think he is honest but he is also a believer. His belief is so strong that he is ready to dismiss any evidence menacing his belief. Here more of his claims:

uO3AGqA.png

Here's the thing. The LHC smashes protons at uber-speed, and then we parse Petabytes of data to find evidence for particles in specific energy ranges. The existence of the Higgs field is itself a statistical approximation. Probably a good one, but the search is not finished yet. Otherwise we could shutdown the LHC and go home.

But Carrol concludes by stating that since we don't have evidence of other forms of energies interacting with ordinary matter that the there is no afterlife, no clairvoyance etc... 100% guarantee, no refunds :D

This is not just hilarious, it's disingenuous.
Didn't we say in early '80s that "cold fusion" was impossible because fusion of atoms via chemical processes doesn't exist? :D
And now we have short LENR courses at MIT, since 2011.

Even if we remain strictly grounded in physics, researchers are looking for a host of other "stuff" that has been hypothesized.
Sparticles for example. If turns out that they exist String theorists will be very happy and that alone would open an enormous can of worms.

How about hidden/multiple dimensions of space? Is the LHC adequate to keep that into account?

In order to take Carrol's conclusions seriously he should first provide a very persuasive argument as to why the LHC is the ultimate tool to observe everything there's to our reality. Now... talk about extraordinary claims! :D

As a side note... I wonder why does Carrol spend half of the talk making sure that "the afterlife" and precognition are erased from the realm of possibility, instead of playing the funeral march for String theorists? Following his line of reasoning (we have looked everywhere!) all physicists working on string theory should start applying for a new job, today!

And the icing on the cake is that all this comes from an advocate of the MWI of QM :D

So Dr Carrol, now that you have "looked everywhere" where is the evidence for the MWI?
As of today, June 20th 2014 the amount of evidence for an afterlife and precognition is disproportionately more abundant than that for multiple worlds spawning every few femtoseconds!
 
Last edited:
Carroll's argument:

1. The standard model is a complete description of reality to everyday scale.

2. If psi abilities and afterlife exist, then they belong to everyday reality.

3. The standard model does not describe psi abilities and afterlife.

4. Then psi abilities and afterlife can not exist.

This argument fails for several reasons. First, the empirical evidence for psi and afterlife be imposed on the theory. Second, the standard model may be incomplete. Third, certain psi phenomena as poltergeists and macroscopic psychokinesis might be explainable by electromagnetism, so that would fall within the standard model. And fourth, certain psi phenomena as manifestations of an afterlife may be based on a sub-quantum level outside everyday reality but may have effects on everyday reality, so that they fall outside the competence of the standard model.
 
I think he is honest but he is also a believer. His belief is so strong that he is ready to dismiss any evidence menacing his belief. Here more of his claims:

uO3AGqA.png


To claim "No life after death" is foolish because he cannot know it. On the contrary there is very much evidence supporting the possibility of life after death.

He has not learned anything from the history of science. For example from this:
Here's the thing. The LHC smashes protons at uber-speed, and then we parse Petabytes of data to find evidence for particles in specific energy ranges. The existence of the Higgs field is itself a statistical approximation. Probably a good one, but the search is not finished yet. Otherwise we could shutdown the LHC and go home.

But Carrol concludes by stating that since we don't have evidence of other forms of energies interacting with ordinary matter that the there is no afterlife, no clairvoyance etc... 100% guarantee, no refunds :D

This is not just hilarious, it's disingenuous.
Didn't we say in early '80s that "cold fusion" was impossible because fusion of atoms via chemical processes doesn't exist? :D
And now we have short LENR courses at MIT, since 2011.

Even if we remain strictly grounded in physics, researchers are looking for a host of other "stuff" that has been hypothesized.
Sparticles for example. If turns out that they exist String theorists will be very happy and that alone would open an enormous can of worms.

How about hidden/multiple dimensions of space? Is the LHC adequate to keep that into account?

In order to take Carrol's conclusions seriously he should first provide a very persuasive argument as to why the LHC is the ultimate tool to observe everything there's to our reality. Now... talk about extraordinary claims! :D

As a side note... I wonder why does Carrol spend half of the talk making sure that "the afterlife" and precognition are erased from the realm of possibility, instead of playing the funeral march for String theorists? Following his line of reasoning (we have looked everywhere!) all physicist working on string theory should start applying for a new job, tomorrow!

And the icing on the cake is that all this comes from an advocate of the MWI of QM :D

So Dr Carrol, now that you have "looked everywhere" where is the evidence for the MWI?
As for today, June 20th 2014 the amount of evidence for an afterlife and precognition is disproportionately more abundant than that for multiple worlds spawning every few femtoseconds!
I would say the charge of certainty you both level at Carrol is reflected equally as well in the posts both of you have made. How likely do you think you both could be wrong? You've asked questions I wouldn't attempt to answer. since I won't I've provided a link to Dr. Carrol's personal page where you may contact him personally email: seancarrollatgmaildotcom. Also at the bottom of that page are links to physics sites where you might be able to get more details why Carrol might be more right than wrong.

There's a similar talk at JREF. Quoting one reply
None of those assumptions are necessary to the results being discussed. The QFT results, though they may be incomplete, already tell us that we now know the rules by which the everyday world operates. Whatever else is out there, whether supernatural, non-physical, magical, other-dimensional, etc., isn't relevant to our everyday lives because it doesn't interact with the fields, forces, and particles of everyday energies and scales; if it did, we'd have noticed it.

This means we can stop wasting our time on hypotheses of everyday interactions that require anything more than the everyday fields, forces, and particles we know. It doesn't mean other stuff isn't out there; just that it isn't relevant to us because it doesn't interact with us.

To paraphrase Dr. Carroll's chess analogy, knowing the rules of chess doesn't make you a good chess player, or give you an understanding of chess positions, but it does mean you can say with certainty whether a move is valid or not. You can reject without further consideration moves that require a rook/castle to move diagonally, or games that introduce novel pieces, etc.
 
Here's someone else detailing in several parts why spiritual energy does not exist.
The Breath of God:
Identifying Spiritual Energy

Victor J. Stenger
Emeritus Professor of Physics and Astronomy, University of Hawaii
Visiting Fellow in Philosophy, University of Colorado
vstenger@mindspring.com
Abstract
If other forms of energy exist beyond those recognized by physics, these should
still be detectable in controlled experiments by the observation of apparent
violation of energy conservation. This includes the psychic energy associated
with paranormal phenomena, the vital energies supposedly manipulated in
alternative medicine, and even supernatural or spiritual energy. So far all the
data are consistent with conservation of the known forms of energy.
Furthermore, observations indicate that the total energy of the universe is zero,
and so no outside energy was necessary to bring it about.
Material Models
Soon after subscribing to Skeptical Inquirer in the early 1980s, I was surprised to discover
that much of what appeared on its pages was related to my own work as a high-energy
particle physicist and astrophysicist. At that time I was heavily involved in the
collaborative efforts being carried out on a grand scale to explore the fundamental
nature of matter and the physical universe. The data gathered at large particle
accelerators had just been successfully interpreted in terms of a new synthesis called the
standard model. In this model, which remains today fully consistent with all observations,
matter is composed of quarks and leptons that interact locally with one another by the
exchange of other particles called gauge bosons.
The atomic nucleus was found to consist of up and down quarks, the lightest of
three generations of quark pairs. The electron that swirls about the nucleus proved to
be the lightest of three electrically charged leptons. The photon, the particle of light,
turned out to be just one of a set of twelve gauge bosons.1
No one believes that this model will be the final one. For one, it does not include
gravity, which remains well described by Einstein’s 1916 theory of general relativity.
Physicists still seek a fully unified picture in what they hope will be the final synthesis,
the “theory of everything,” although I am personally holding off my bets. The current
most promising approach is m-theory, in which the fundamental objects are m-
dimensional m-branes.2 A particle is a 0-brane, a string a 1-brane, and so on. A politician
is a p-brane. Whatever the dimensionality, the approach remains one in which localized,
discrete bits of matter form the primary elements of nature....
 
Part 2
Combining the results from nuclear and particle physics with a great variety of
astronomical observations, cosmologists have begun to draw a comprehensive picture,
at least in broad terms, of the evolution and structure of the universe. The big bang,
now well established by ever-improving agreement between theory and observation,
has been enhanced by the inflationary model that offers plausible solutions for most of
the remaining problems of the original theory.3 Inflation is also strongly supported by
the data, but will be severely tested in the next year or two as accurate new
measurements are made on the structure of the cosmic microwave background. Recent
observations on distant supernovae indicate that the expansion of the universe is
accelerating under the action of some yet-unidentified “dark energy,” that constitutes
the bulk, over two-thirds, of the mass-energy of the universe.4
As a result of all this progress over the recent decades, we can now safely say
that the wide range of observations of thousands of scientists worldwide, with the best
instrumentation modern technology can provide, reveal a universe that contains
matter and nothing more. No data or theories currently require the introduction of
either supernatural forces or immaterial substances.
Something More?
Many supernatural and paranormal claims do not fit within this new synthesis of
physics and cosmology. They assert something more, that the universe contains other
ingredients beyond the known particles and forces in physics. By itself, of course, this
does not imply a contradiction. Perhaps these nonnatural effects are so tiny as to be
very difficult to detect. Or, perhaps the detectors of physics and astronomy are not
suitable for these phenomena, just as a telescope cannot be used to see bacteria.
Indeed, the observations reported by parapsychologists are not made with high-
tech instruments. Rather they are based on unusual human experiences, reported as
anecdotes, or simple experiments that can be done on the dining table in your own
home. Even the experiments conducted in the handful of university parapsychology
laboratories are crude by the standards of the conventional science being done on the
same campuses.
To be found so easily and cheaply, paranormal forces, if they exist, must exert
powerful control over normal matter. If paranormal claims are valid, then the picture
of the universe that is rapidly evolving in all the major physics laboratories and
astronomical observatories around the world is wrong or at best grossly incomplete.
The common thread I see running through most of paranormal claims is the
hypothesis that the universe contains a nonmaterial component that plays a significant
role in the lives of humans--possibly providing the animating source for life and
consciousness.5 This substance is often identified as some form of force or energy not
presently registered in the scientific inventory.
Although infrequently described so explicitly, mind-over-matter and mind-tomind communication can be thought of as resulting from the flow of “psychic energy.”
Perhaps the stars control our lives by means of the transmission of “cosmic energy.”
Acupuncture, therapeutic touch, and other complementary healing techniques work by
bringing the body’s “vital energy” into better balance.6 Similarly, trivial
electromagnetic phenomena, such as infrared “auras” and Kirlian photography7 are
promoted as evidence for a human “energy field.” Energy seems to be a unifying
concept among many paranormal claims.
Energy and Spirit
The English word energy comes from the Greek energeia for activity. Webster gives 1599
as the earliest date for its use, but energy did not play an identifiable role in physics
until 1847. At that time, Helmholtz introduced the law of conservation of energy, also
known as the first law of thermodynamics, which has proven to be one of the most
powerful principles of physics.
Most people presume that life and consciousness require some activating agent
beyond cold, impersonal matter. I suppose it would be consistent with the root of the
term to call this a kind of energy. However, what is being proposed by paranormalists
appears to be little different from the traditional notions of “spirit or “soul.” This
strikes me as yet another example of an old idea being given a new, scientific-sounding
name to make it sound like something new and give it modern authority.
The term“spirit” also has a classical root, deriving from the Latin spiritus for
breath. Breath was associated with “soul,” the source of life, in many ancient cultures,
including the Hebrew. In Genesis, God breathes life into Adam. Modern
supernaturalists seem to being saying that they can feel the “breath of God” upon their
cheeks.
Although many skeptics prefer not to bring religion into the discussions of
paranormal claims, a connection between religion and the paranormal is impossible to
avoid because of the connection with the supernatural, either direct or implied. No
matter how much the editors of skeptical publications may wish to avoid offending
potential subscribers, science and religion are two “magesteria” that cannot help but
overlap when discussing paranormal claims.
The paranormal concepts of psychic, cosmic, and vital energies arise out of
traditional religious beliefs, usually referred to as “deeply held.” To challenge
paranormal claims is to challenge religious beliefs, perhaps the very existence of soul.8
Indeed, many of the original paranormal researchers, such as Oliver Lodge,
William Crookes, and Joseph Banks Rhine, seem to have had strong religious
motivations for their efforts to demonstrate the reality of psychic phenomena.9 I
suspect many of the current investigators have similar motivations and that much of
their mostly private funding is donated in the hope of “proving” religious beliefs. The
religious overtones of astrology, UFOlogy, alien abductions, and much of alternative
medicine are also evident....
 
Part 3
If the existence of ESP could be shown, then this would be interpreted by many
as evidence for the long-sought spiritual element to the universe. Although natural
explanations would still have to be ruled out, these are not very likely to be found
based on what we already know about the physical universe. Psychic energy is not part
of the current standard model and no conceivable extension makes any room for it.
And, as I have written about extensively, quantum mechanics also offers no refuge for
mystical beliefs.10 But, none of this means we might not find psychic energy if we look
in the right place.
Before we start a search, we need to identify some of the properties of the object
we are seeking. If what we are looking for is a form of energy, then it should have the
properties of energy. So, what are the characteristics of other forms of energy that have
been identified in physics?
Until the end of the eighteenth century, heat was regarded as physical substance,
caloric, that flowed in and out of bodies. However, this substance was not, to my
knowledge, ever directly equated with energy. The connection between heat and
energy came about when Thompson and Joule refuted the caloric model by showing
that heat was associated with kinetic energy, that is, motional energy.
Another generic form of energy is potential energy. This is the energy a body
may have stored that can be later converted into other forms. Thus the gravitational
potential energy of a falling body is converted to kinetic as the falls closer to earth.
Electrical potential energy is converted to light and sound in a lightning discharge, each
of the latter being forms of kinetic energy.
These examples illustrate an important point. Classical physics never regarded
energy as a substance of some kind, but rather as a measure of motion or capacity for
motion; this is consistent with its root meaning of “activity.” Even when Einstein
showed that energy and mass were related by E = mc2, this did not mean that energy
was now to be regarded as a material substance. Rather, matter was understood as
containing within its rest mass m a certain stored capacity mc2 for inducing motion. For
example, in chemical and nuclear explosions, rest energy is converted to kinetic energy.
astrology’s “cosmic energy” is not associated with gravity, and so not dependent on the
mass of the body, we should expect a reciprocal square dependence in the ratio of the
effects of two planets or stars. For example, Mars would have over six hundred times
the effect of Saturn and billions of times the effect of any star.
Again, the point that I am trying to make here is not that the absence of a
distance effect disproves the existence of paranormal phenomena. Rather, the
observation of a distance effect would provide an indication of the presence of some
form of energy that would be strong evidence for the paranormal. This essay is meant
to be positive; I am looking for a way to discover psychic or spiritual energy that would
be convincing to a skeptical physicist. Solid, scientific evidence for the apparent violation
of energy conservation would be a sign of some previously unknown form of energy,
within our universe or without.
For example, consider a body at rest and completely isolated from all known
sources of energy. Suddenly it is observed to start moving. Such an observation would
indicate an apparent violation of energy conservation. A moving body has kinetic
energy, but the original energy was zero. If this happens when someone casts his
thoughts in the direction of the body, and conventional explanations (like trickery) can
be ruled out, then this would be evidence for psychic energy converting into kinetic
energy.
As we have seen, the term energy is frequently used in paranormal theories as
equivalent to the ancient notion of soul or spirit as the motivating element of life. The
notion of conservation of energy can still be maintained in these theological terms. The
breath of God, which we suppose carries the motivating energy, simply comes from
outside the universe. This is no more difficult to conceive than a child propelling a boat
in the bathtub by blowing on its sail. God’s breath could have provided the energy for
the parting of the Red Sea for Moses.
Unfortunately, we have only anecdotal evidence for these kinds of observations.
None are scientifically documented. Indeed, paranormal phenomena seem to become
neutralized in the presence of knowledgeable and especially skeptical observers. If such
events could be captured on sophisticated instruments in properly controlled
experiments, then we would have to take them seriously.
Let me give another example. Suppose the Virgin Mary were to appear for a
minute in an open field in the presence of nonbeliever scientists. Magicians James Randi
and Joe Nickell are also present to detect any trickery. Instruments record the event so
it cannot be attributed to a collective hallucination.
The lady steps on a scale and is found to weigh 50 kilograms. This corresponds to
a rest energy of 4.4x1018 Joules. The scientists and magicians can find no source of
energy anywhere near this amount. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle allows a
certain quantum fluctuation of energy over a one minute period, but this is only 5.5x1036 Joules. So this can’t account for the energy observed. Most of those present would
likely conclude that they witnessed a miracle.
While this example would make many of us believers, the simple observation of
the violation of energy conservation in, say, a particle physics experiment, would not
lead us to immediate conversion. Perhaps the energy came from another universe, or
another dimension, a possibility that has been recently proposed. Or, we may just be
missing something purely material. For example, when nuclear beta-decay was first
observed in the early twentieth century, energy did not seem to be conserved. It was
later discovered that a previously unknown particle, the neutrino, was carrying away
the missing energy. Such natural explanations would still have to be ruled out. I did not
say that detecting spiritual energy would be easy!
 
I would say the charge of certainty you both level at Carrol is reflected equally as well in the posts both of you have made. How likely do you think you both could be wrong?
You're missing the point once again.

The point is simply that Carrol's conclusions are based on his personal belief about the current state of the SM.
The LHC has produced some interesting results, which are nicely exposed in the first half of the talk. The second half is just his own speculative rant, but it is sold as indisputable truth, from a man of science. Additionally he's playing cheap rhetoric tricks by replacing "I" with "We" to make his presumptions sound more authoritative.

Misleading and goofy.
 
Last edited:
Part 4
Criteria
From my reading of the literature of parapsychology, I conclude that psychic energy
has not yet been conclusively detected in any experiments or observations. In the
history of paranormal studies, going back over a century now, one can find at any
given time one or two experiments that proponents claim are solid evidence for psi.
Typically these fade away and are replaced by new claims. Today, remote viewing and
random-number generator experiments are fashionable. While proponents insist the
evidence is strong, it does not convince most scientists. Here again is where particle
physics comes in to account for my personal skepticism.
For forty years I was involved in a field where extraordinary new discoveries
were being made regularly, often several a year. I personally played a small role in
some of these, including most recently the evidence for neutrino mass found in Japan in
1998. Colleagues of mine were involved in the first observation of the top quark a few
years earlier. In these cases and many others, the physics journals did not permit
publication until a certain threshold of statistical significance was passed, along with
other stringent criteria.
The statistical criterion for publication of a new phenomenon in physics demands
that if you were to repeat the experiment ten thousand times, the observed effect, or
something greater, would not occur more than once on average as a random artifact.
This must be demonstrated quantitatively, which today requires extensive calibrations
of the detectors and elaborate computer programs that simulate all conceivable
backgrounds.
Some psi proponents have argued that the criteria that should be applied in
parapsychology are those of psychology or medicine, not physics. In these fields, the
statistical threshold has been traditionally 1/20 rather than 1/10000. This low standard
is justified in two ways: First, 1/10000 is impossible to achieve in most cases; second, the
primary goal of psychology and medicine is to help people. Making extraordinary new
discoveries is a secondary goal.
While these justifications have merit, the fact remains that 1/20 is a rather loose
criterion, far too loose even for the purposes stated. The implication is that up to one in
twenty results published in medical and psychological journals could be a statistical
artifact. In fact, given the propensity of investigators to not publish negative results, the
number could be even greater. No wonder the public is often confused by news reports
of studies that say one thing, only to be contradicted by studies that say the opposite.
Many of the studies should not have been published in the first place.
In any event, authors cannot reasonably claim that they have demonstrated the
existence of psychic, vital, or spiritual energy when the statistical significance is at the
ridiculously low 1/20 level. The demonstration of any extraordinary phenomenon
demands extraordinary criteria. I can guarantee that psi will not be accepted into the
consensus of science until it is demonstrated with much greater significance and
independently replicated, in quantitative detail, to at least the same level of significance
Throughout the Cosmos
Given the great difficulty of designing foolproof, and cheatproof, experiments
involving people, I have grave doubts that this level of significance will ever be
achieved by this approach. But why should we rely on human experiments? If
humanity never evolved, or if the earth were destroyed tomorrow by a cosmic
cataclysm, neutrinos and quarks would still exist. Similarly, if spiritual energy exists, it
should not matter whether or not humanity does. The breath of God should be
detectable throughout the cosmos, not just on earth.
As I have already remarked, those instruments that explore the cosmos have not
yet revealed any mysterious sources of energy that might even remotely be considered
supernatural. Although the nature of the dark energy is still uncertain, such a
component to the universe is allowed by existing theories and remains in the physical
realm. The processes observed at the greatest distances from earth, and deep into the
past, still exhibit energy conservation.
This undisputed fact has led many theists to look to the origin of the universe as
evidence for an external source of energy that could be associated with a creator God.
Surely, the argument goes, energy had to be pumped into the universe at the
beginning. Else, where did all the current matter and energy come from?
Well, it turns out that as best as we can tell from observations, the total energy of
the universe is zero, within allowed quantum fluctuations. The positive kinetic and rest
energy of all the matter in the universe seems to be exactly balanced by the negative
gravitational potential energy of that matter.
This observation is equivalent to the one you will read in articles about
cosmology that the universe on the average is flat. That is, although an arbitrary
curvature of spacetime is allowed by Einstein’s equations of general relativity, the
overall curvature that seems to exist in fact is zero. The energy of a flat, empty
spacetime is zero, give or take the tiny zero point energy expected by quantum
mechanics.
niverse is predicted, indeed required, by the inflationary big bang
cosmological model. In this model, the universe underwent a rapid exponential
expansion during its first moments that stretched out its original curvature, whatever it
was, to zero. The observation of a nonflat average geometry to the universe would
doom inflation, and perhaps also open up room for a creator.
Recently, a brief interim occurred in which inflation seemed to be in deep
trouble. Observations indicated that the matter of the universe, including the yet-
unidentified dark matter, could provide no more than about 30 percent of the mass
needed to give a flat universe. But then, in two independent investigations on
supernova in distant galaxies, the remarkable, unanticipated discovery was made that
expansion of the universe is accelerating.12 Some additional component to the universe,
which I have previously mentioned--the dark energy (or “quintessence”), is producing
a negative pressure that is pushing the galaxies apart. Furthermore, the amount of this
dark energy seems to be just what is needed to give a flat universe. Thus, the energy
conservation equation is once again in balance, with only a slight quantum fluctuation
away from zero energy, allowed by natural processes, needed to produce the universe
as we know it.
 
Part 5
Conclusions
The great majority of humanity believes in the existence of forms of energy beyond
those currently recognized by physics. In this essay I have tried to indicate how these
might be detected to the satisfaction of the scientific community. Energy conservation is
one of the great principles of physics. The observation of an apparent violation of
energy conservation in a carefully controlled experiment would imply the existence of
another form of energy. The source of this energy could be within our universe, in the
form of “psychic” or “vital” energy, or some source of energy from outside the
universe.
I do not hold out much hope for these energies to be found in experiments
involving humans with the significance required for such an extraordinary discovery.
Such experiments are too hard to control, too easily contaminated by psychological
factors or trickery. However, if the phenomena exist, they should be evident elsewhere,
on earth and in the cosmos.
The observation of an apparent violation of energy conservation at a particle
accelerator or astronomical telescope would not constitute immediate evidence for the
supernatural. Obviously, natural explanations would have to be sought and ruled out.
In any case, the discovery would be remarkable.
One obvious place to look for a violation of energy conservation is in the energy
balance of the universe as a whole. For many years it seemed that the universe
contained too little matter for negative gravitational potential energy to cancel the
positive kinetic energy in the motions of galaxies. The universe seemed to have positive
energy that would have had to be inserted from the outside at sometime in its history.
However, increasingly precise observations have indicated that invisible components of
matter exist, dark matter and dark energy, that provide an exact balance between
positive kinetic and negative potential energy. Thus the total energy of the universe
appears to be zero and no input of energy from outside, either natural or supernatural,
seems to have been needed to bring the universe into being.
The author is grateful for comments and suggestions from Keith Douglas, Ron
Ebert, Taner Edis, Bill Jefferys, Edward Oleen, Bill Spight, Ed Weinmann, and Roahn
Wynar.
References
1. Many books contain descriptions of the standard model. For my own account,
see Stenger, Victor J. Timeless Reality: Symmetry, Simplicity, and Multiple Universes,
Amherst N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2000.
2. Greene, Brian. The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the
Quest for the Ultimate Theory. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.
3. Kazanas D. "Dynamics of the Universe and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking."
Astrophysical Journal 241: L59-63, 1980; Guth, A. "Inflationary Universe: A Possible
Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems." Physical Review D23: 347-356,
1981; Guth, Alan. The Inflationary Universe. New York: Addison-Wesley, 1997;
Linde, Andre. "Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology," Physics Today 40:
61-68, 1987; Linde, Andre. Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology. New York:
Academic Press, 1990 .
4. Peter M. Garnavich et al. "Supernova Limits on the Cosmic Equation of State."
Astrophysical Journal 509: 74-79, 1998.
5. Bergson, H., Creative Evolution. New York: Macmillan, 1911; Driesch, H. History
and Theory of Vitalism. New York, 1914. Macmillan; Wheeler, L. Richard. Vitalism:
Its History and Validity. London: Witherby, 1930.
6. Brennen, B. A. Hands of Light: A Guide to Healing Through the Human Energy Field.
New York: Bantam New Age Books, 1988; Stefanatos, Joanne. "Introduction to
Bioenergetic Medicine." Chapter 16 of Complementary and Alternative Veterinary
Medicine: Principles and Practice edited by Allen M. Schoen and Susan G. Wynn.
Mosby-Year Book, 1997; Rogers, M. "Science of Unitary Human Beings." In V. M.
Malinski (ed.) Explorations of Martha Rogers' Science of Unitary Human Beings.
Norwark: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1986; Rosa, L., E. Rosa, L. Sarner, and S.
Barrett. "A Close Look at Therapeutic Touch." Journal of the American Medical
Association 279: 1005-1010, 1998; Ulett, George. "Therapeutic Touch: Tracing Back
to Mesmer." The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine 1 (1): 16-18, 1997;
Scheiber, Béla, and Carla Selby, eds., Therapeutic Touch. Amherst N.Y.:
Prometheus Books, 2000.
7. Pehek, John O., Hay J. Kyler, and David L. Faust. "Image Modulation in Corona
Discharge Photography." Science 194: 263-270, 1976; Singer, Barry. "Kirlian
Photography." In Science and the Paranormal. Edited by George O. Abell and
Barry Singer. New York: Scribners, 1981.
8. Elbert, Jerome W. Are Souls Real? Amherst N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2000.
9. Kurtz, Paul. The Transcendental Temptation: A Critique of Science and the
Paranormal. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1986; Stenger, Victor J. Physics
and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Senses. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus
Books, 1990.
10. Stenger, Victor J. The Unconscious Quantum: Metaphysics in Modern Physics and
Cosmology. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1995.
11. Hansel, C. E. M. The Search for Psychic Power: ESP and Parapsychology Revisted.
Amherst N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1989.
12. Garnavitch 1998.
A flat universe
 
You're missing the point once again.

The point is simply that Carrol's conclusions are based on his personal belief about the current state of the SM.
The LHC has produced some interesting results, which are nicely exposed in the first half of the talk. The second half is just his own speculative rant, but it is sold as indisputable truth, from a man of science. Additionally he's playing cheap rhetoric tricks by replacing "I" with "We" to make his presumptions sound more authoritative.

Misleading and goofy.
I see what you are saying; none of the ideas I read here are ever based upon personal belief.
 
While I agree with the sentiment put in Carroll's exposition ( that the Standard Model is pretty much our best bet so far to understand how reality behaves ), the Standard Model is neither complete nor is the end. We don't have, for example, an explanation for Dark Matter ( and no quantum field or quantum particle of said fields seem to be fit the bill right now), nor we do have a fussion of quantum mechanics and general relativity, or an for neutrinos oscillation, that according to the Standard Model, should be massless ( yet they do have mass!), there is also Muonic Hydrogen, etc, etc.

While I'm a materialist ( so far ), I hold to Chalmers Property Dualism theory of the mind, which I think have a lot of potential for explaining psi, in case it exists.

PD: BTW I'm new, hello to all of you folks!

Welcome! I think Chalmers is sympathetic to panpsychism and some sort of primordial fundamental consciousness. Thanks to Psiborg for the interview page. http://filosofisksupplement.no/on-t...-philosophy-an-interview-with-david-chalmers/
 
Carroll assumes two things: that there is no room for psi and afterlife in the standard model and if psi exists, then it must be a type of energy. Both assumptions could be wrong: some psi phenomena may be due to electromagnetism, as the macroscopic psychokinesis, and other psi phenomena can not be energetic, but use certain holographic properties of the universe for be real without energetic or material transfer.
 
And the icing on the cake is that all this comes from an advocate of the MWI of QM :D

So Dr Carrol, now that you have "looked everywhere" where is the evidence for the MWI?
As of today, June 20th 2014 the amount of evidence for an afterlife and precognition is disproportionately more abundant than that for multiple worlds spawning every few femtoseconds!

WHAT SCIENTIFIC IDEA IS READY FOR RETIREMENT?

Sean Carroll:

Falsifiability

"....Modern physics stretches into realms far removed from everyday experience, and sometimes the connection to experiment becomes tenuous at best. String theory and other approaches to quantum gravity involve phenomena that are likely to manifest themselves only at energies enormously higher than anything we have access to here on Earth. The cosmological multiverse and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics posit other realms that are impossible for us to access directly. Some scientists, leaning on Popper, have suggested that these theories are non-scientific because they are not falsifiable.

The truth is the opposite. Whether or not we can observe them directly, the entities involved in these theories are either real or they are not. Refusing to contemplate their possible existence on the grounds of some a priori principle, even though they might play a crucial role in how the world works, is as non-scientific as it gets...."
 
I think he is honest but he is also a believer. His belief is so strong that he is ready to dismiss any evidence menacing his belief. Here more of his claims:

uO3AGqA.png


To claim "No life after death" is foolish because he cannot know it. On the contrary there is very much evidence supporting the possibility of life after death.

He has not learned anything from the history of science. For example from this:

Well... This is one of the most severe cases of confusing the map with the territory I've ever seen!

I think Miguel Cervantes' Don Quixote is a good comparison here. His hero perceived knight epic tales as reality; Carroll seems to do the same thing with the Standard model of physics.

This is even funny. Hasn't it yet dawned on him that models are what they are - models, not reality?
 
Back
Top