As a neuroscientist: lots of my study is improved by the understanding of physics. Electrophysiology is a classical example of folks studying the physics-only aspect of neurobiology. But, more crucially than that, our brain cells are ion-specific. Some times they let in only sodium, some times only potassium, and some times only calcium. Understanding how biology maintains specificity at the single atom level, while letting in millions of those atoms in at the same time is a purely physical riddle. We have some answers to it, if I've sparked your curiosity. ;)

can you get to neuroscience, language or culture without physics?

I don't see the chain, but I might be overlooking something super obvious (or not so obvious)

Arithmetic isn't super helpful for calculus, but it's real tough (for me) to construct calculus without a notion of +.

So, I don't have any evidence of math, the very narrow branch of math in the sense of algebra, and proofs without electric meat. I'm open to a very broad definition. I think, we agree that two different things are equal, and if we change both sides the same way, they're still equal. that kind of gives us algebra.

Does anything else do that? Does anything else preserve equality that's not just simple physics?

Again, I'm wildly unqualified to make this argument, but maybe I learn something amazing.

How do you "close the knot"? I've got some computer science background and I can mostly deal with fix points. In what way would neuroscience be free from the underlying systems? I'm pretty sure I can represent computation with gears or electrons or marbles, or whatever, but those are rooted in physics. I'm super curious how you might represent neuroscience, language and culture without that foundation.