I bought and read Carroll’s book Big Picture, so I’m familiar.On the point of immateriality, I do not see quantum fields as concrete objects. I see them as abstract objects that express what is concrete: energy. I see them no differently than Bohr’s model of atoms (which is conceptually accurate but ontologically false).
Theistic Reflection --1. The simplest elementary particles that I think the Singularity could produce are photons because they have zero rest-mass. The metaphor/poetry of "let there be light" is quite remarkable given this. 2. I believe when one views the properties as a "system" or a "structure" rather than arbitrary components that happen to fit together 'just so' for our Universe to emerge, then the paradigm of digital physics begins to look like a clear winner in terms of which metaphysical vocabulary we should adopt. The reason is because the properties constitute logic, and this logic determines the manner in which our Universe emerged. If so, we can think of God as the source code of the Universe, or the Logos.3. If the Source Code determines why and how everything within a space-time cube self-organizes or quantizes, and this in principle can be applied to larger scales that go far beyond a single space-time cube (such as galaxies), then the Source Code is a part of everything that exists because it is IN everything that exists.
In regard to the OP, whether we assume space-time to be fundamental or not is probably less relevant to the point that you are trying to make, no? I mean whether our universe emerged as space-time from a pure quantum state of affairs, or whether it was something like an initial "singularity" state (akin to the Hartle-Hawking state) is probably not that important..?
In any case, the naturalist will argue that all we require for this same scenario to work is something like a teleological force of nature, something like an optimizing function towards complexity, or an information/entropy optimization of sorts. We could for example imagine nature utilizing natural selection among all probable path projections, converging and entangling along universal wave functions according to such teleological force whereby encoded/decoded information is its dynamic interactive tool. Nature seemingly has "smart" quantum mechanisms aplenty to pull this off; we observe such interactions and optimization in (quantum) nature.
OP, there is no T0 I believe; t0 is an ideal limit that doesn't actually exist because this would entail an ontological commitment to the reality of points and instants.We can say the universe has a beginning, but not that it has an explicit beginning point.
Right, I think proposing a "Fifth Force" or some kind of "Superforce" is a sufficient solution to Harvey's "dilemma." Although I think an "optimization principle" is really just shorthand for self-replication, self-organization, self-quantization, self-coherence, etc. As I asked in Tom's newest thread, the most relevant question we can ask in these discussions is what instantiates what? If this so-called Superforce or Optimization Principle is the invisible hand that shapes and directs energy where to go and how it is to evolve, then we're getting into Platonist/Idealist territory if this Superforce is eternal, universal, immaterial, abstract, and uncaused.
Quote from: lucious on May 11, 2020, 08:42:34 amOP, there is no T0 I believe; t0 is an ideal limit that doesn't actually exist because this would entail an ontological commitment to the reality of points and instants.We can say the universe has a beginning, but not that it has an explicit beginning point.That's fine. I am biting the bullet with respect to such commitments. I think space-time is completely quantized.
What is this deep structure, but something eternal, universal, immaterial, abstract, and uncaused?