[oogetyboogety]

This.

The assumption that we know how atoms work in the brain is absurdly reductionist. I would ask a physicist well versed in information theory to validate the holographic principle's validity. Once they make this breakthrough in physics, then I would use that result to begin to put faith into Sean Carroll's assumption.

"Afterlife" isn't even well defined in this argument. What decisions and experiences are the ones that define you as a conscious individual in the physical sense? Based on your answer to this, I could recreate an "afterlife" decision matrix for you matching your personality to varying degrees by reprogramming the relevant constructs that exist in your brain.

For a physicist, this is not a scientific argument at all. It all sounds very philosophical.