What we must accept if we accept materialism

Really, really hating to come on this... No we don't, we see quantum mechanics at work. No, there is not a hidden mechanism - this was dismissed long ago - there is quantum mechanics. QM is the mechanism.And there is no "action at a distance" in the usual sense. There is certainly no superluminal transfer of anything... This makes no sense. No it does not. I didn't see anyone claim that material must contain matter. I saw Percy repeatedly state that matter and energy constitute material. But all of this is a very naive appreciation of the concept of material from the POV of theoretical physicists.The fact is we already play in the arena of the "deeper reality", looking at moduli spaces, the "reality" of the Lagrangian, superspace methods, etc. We don't look for the explanations of entanglement... it's already explained by QM. And this deeper reality does not contain anything close to what I call spirit or spirituality... unless you call general wackyness and disassociation with everyday concepts of reality, spirituality. I don't.I would be more than delighted to see evidence of God in theoretical physics... the fact is it is not there, or at least no more there than it is in observations of the heavens, views across the Alps, the sight of my 2yr old asleep. This does not follow at all. Does God contain "energy"? Energy is purely a local function of this universe, and simply an expression of deep symmetry. Observations of God or other supernatural apparitions could easily be internal mental observations.

No I'm not. I'm saying that entanglement isn't evidence of it. And give me any one definition of a "thing" that is not a description of something that occurs... Is there? Heh, heh... if you want to mean "deeper reality" to mean that beyond which you have any decent knowledge then fair enough.You may have begun the journey of understanding some of this stuff... which is commendable... but you are a million miles still from the front line, and certainly in no position to decide what does and what does not constitute some deeper reality of theoretical physics. Percy said AND ENERGY... and he didn't imply the logical AND in that statement. Perhaps and/or would make it more explicit for you. nice try... When did I deny such a thing?Percy is quite correct... you make statements about this "deeper reality" as if you have some knowledge of this area. I'm not being rude, but you know absolutely nothing about it. We are talking the limits of what we explore in theoretical/mathematical physics... you are not in any position to say that any of it sounds like something spiritual or not. You have no idea. The descriptions here are totally mathematical.This isn't new. You do realise that the Maharishi beat you to all of this. Just a little before my time, it was believed that all of physics had been solved by N=8 SUGRA, the TOE had been found. Several years later, after some red faces, the Natural Law Party brought out a huge pamphlet describing how all the different terms of the HUGE N=8 Lagrangian reflected all the different aspects of TM and its relation to our chakras... proving the divine nature of TM and the altogether rightness of the Mahrishi. It was a sheer joy that reduced many of us to uncontrollable tears of mirth.Stop looking for God in the minutae and start seeing Him in the big picture.

Of course we consider additional dimensions... but to us, this is so mundane that, no, we do not consider this a deeper reality; it is just a natural extension. What we consider a deeper reality is way way beyond the almost trivial idea of extra dimensions.My theology in this respect is based upon evidence, with no prior desire nor preconception. Should the evidence change, my ideas will change.At the moment, fundemental physics speaks no more of the spiritual than neuroscience. I think from the standpoint of this thread, the onus is on you to define what you mean by spiritual. What have the probablistic notions of entanglement to do with spirituality? What have extra dimensions to do with spirituality?