THE POST SCIENCE PARADIGM Was the Universe Designed? Particle Physicists Driven to Deism

1. THE POST SCIENCE PARADIGM Was the Universe Designed? Particle Physicists Driven to Deism Prof. Dr. Hugo de Garis (former) Director of the Artificial Brain Lab (ABL) Institute of Artificial Intelligence, Department of Computer Science, Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian Province, China. profhugodegaris@yahoo.com https://profhugodegaris.wordpress.com 1/50

2. Contents of Talk • Motivation • 0. Luther’s World View (16th Century) • Hugo’s World View (21st Century) • Future Man’s World View (26th Century) ??? • Introduction (“Hugo’s 10 Point Thesis”) • 1. Laws of Physics Same Throughout the Universe • 2. Nearly All Stars Have Planets • 3. Most Planets are Billions of Years Older than Ours • 4. Life Evolved Everywhere • 5. Some Biological Lifeforms Became Intelligent • 6. Some Intelligent Biological Lifeforms Created Artilects 2/50

3. 3/50 • Review of the Artilect • 7. Some Artilects Attained Godlike Hyperintelligence • Godlike Artilects were Capable of Designing and Building • Universes Based on Advanced Math • Our Universe May Be the Mathematical Creation of such an • Artilect “Deity.” • The Rise of the Artilect this Century Makes This Paradigm Shift Plausible • This science based Deism is the NEW PARADIGM, called • “DEO-SCIENCE”

4. Evidence (Strong Clues) • 11. Femto-tech to X-techs to Planck-tech • 12. The Laws of Physics Become Ever More Mathematical • Examples • 13. Mendeleev’s Periodic Table of the Chemical Elements • 14. Gellmann’s Classification of the Elementary Particles Using • su(3) Lie Algebra Representations • 15. Borcherd’s Modeling of a 26 Dimensional String Theory • Using the Monster Simple Group • 16. Guth’s “How to Build a Universe” Model • 17. Tegmark’s “The Universe IS Mathematics” • 18. (James) Gates Finds Error Correction Codes in SUSY • (Supersymmetric) String Theory Laws 4/50

5. 19. Anthropic Principle (Fantastically Improbable Fine Tuning • of the Laws of Physics to Allow Matter & Life to Exist • Paradigm Shift • 20. Reactions from Scientists • 21. Reactions from Theists • 22. Reactions from Philosophers • 23. Dawkin’s Argument against a Deity • 24. How Can Science Prove the Existence of a Deity (i.e. a • Hyper Artilect)? 5/50

6. 6/50 Martin LUTHER (Father of the Reformation) 1483 – 1546 Tortured by His Beliefs, His World View

7. 7/50 Motivation 0. Luther’s World View (16th Century) Martin Luther (father of the Reformation) saw the world very differently (in the 16th century) from the way I (as a typical 21st century scientist) see it. Luther was a tortured soul, believing in a vengeful god who punished sinners by tormenting them in hell for eternity. So he strove very hard not to be a sinner. He suffered greatly due to his beliefs, his world view. I was struck how wildly different Luther’s and my views of the world were. This difference got me thinking. Will a 26th Century man think as differently from me, as I do to Luther?

8. 8/50 0. Hugo’s World View (21st Century) Prof. Dr. Hugo de Garis (1947 - 2050) A typical 21st century (cynical) scientist, “Dont believe anything without evidence!” Its not good enough to have a plausible hypothesis. You have to go into the REAL world and TEST that hypothesis, because probably it’s wrong! Hypothesis testing is the ESSENCE of science!

9. 9/50 0. Future Man’s World View (26th Century) ??? How will he see the world? Will it be with a science based paradigm, or with a post science paradigm? If the latter, then WHAT post science paradigm? That is the topic of this talk.

10. (“Hugo’s 10 Point Thesis”) 1. The Laws of Physics are the same Throughout the Universe 10/50 Even galaxies billions of light years away obey the same laws of physics. Scientists know this because the light from these galaxies has the same properties.

11. 11/50 2. Nearly All Stars Have Planets The Kepler telescope has detected more than 2300 exoplanets, 30 Earth size planets Nearly all stars have planets!! Bruno was RIGHT!

12. 12/50 Kepler telescope’s exoplanets ordered by size. Estimates are that there are 40 billion earth size planets in our galaxy!

13. 3. Most Planets are Billions of Years Older than Ours 13/50 Caffaus Star, 13.2 billion years old, the oldest observed star in our galaxy. The big bang, the birth of our universe, was 13.8 billion years ago. Our sun and solar system formed about 4.6 billion years ago.

14. 14/50 4. Life Evolved Everywhere We don’t know if this is true yet, but it is very probable, because the ingredients for life, i.e. C, N, O, etc., energy, and liquid water are everywhere throughout the universe. When independent life is found elsewhere, it will be the greatest discoveryin the history of science! It is likely to happen within a few decades at most. Maybe Deo-science will be an even greater discovery?!

15. 15/50 5. Some Biological Lifeforms Became Intelligent

16. 16/50 6. Some Intelligent Biological Lifeforms Created Artilects ARTILECT = Artificial Intellect, i.e. a godlike massively intelligent machine, with mental capacities trillions of trillions of times above the human level!

17. 17/50 7. Some Artilects Attained Godlike Hyperintelligence A single grain of sand (1 cubic millimeter) that has been nanoteched, manipulating 1 bit of information per atom, switching in femtoseconds (= a thousandth of a trillionth of a second) can outperform the human brain by a factor of a quintillion = a million trillion times. An asteroid that is similarly nanoteched can outperform the grain of sand by a factor of a trillion trillion. If the asteroid is a classical computer, with N atoms, it can do Nthings at a time. If the asteroid is a quantum computer, with N atoms, it can do 2expN things at a time, i.e. it will be GODLIKE in its mental capacities!! Intelligence is about recognizing patterns, and meta patterns, and meta meta patterns, ad infinitum. Massive computing capacity enables massive intelligence!!!

18. 18/50 • Godlike Artilects were Capable of Designing and Building Universes • Based on Advanced Math

19. 19/50 • Our Universe May Be the Mathematical Creation of such an Artilect “Deity.” creates

20. 20/50 • The Rise of the Artilect this Century Makes This Paradigm Shift Plausible

21. Evidence of Thesis (Strong Clues) The POWER of X-techs 11. Femto-tech to X-techs to Planck-tech 21/50 A femto-meter is a thousandth of a trillionth of a meter, i.e. the scale of the nucleus, protons, neutrons and quarks. Femto-tech is tech at the femtometer scale, femto-engineering, femto-computing. Every time you scale down by a factor of 1000, the performance of your tech goes up by a factor of a trillion, because the density of components goes up a billion times, and the signaling time is reduced by a thousand times. Millitech, Microtech, Nanotech, Picotech, Femtotech, Attotech, Zeptotech, Yoctotech, …, X-tech, … Plancktech. The Planck scale is nearly a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a meter, the smallest length that theorists have imagined, the scale of strings in string theory. I have found (in theory) ways to create a femtotech, i.e. femtocomputing and femtoengineering, using quarks and gluons (3 quarks make a proton or a neutron, and gluons glue the quarks together.)

22. 22/50 Femtocomputing Quarks have a property called “color-charge” (nothing to do with redness, etc). Gluons are doubly color-charged, e.g. a “red-antiblue” color-charged gluon. When quarks and gluons interact, color-charge is conserved. A color-charge and its anticolor-charge cancel each other. Imagine a blue color-charged quark Qb interacts with an antiblue-red gluon G~br The blue quark Qb absorbs the gluon and becomes a red color-charged quark Qr i.e. G~br + Qb Qr The color charge of the quark has switched from blue to red, so think of a red quark as a 1 and a blue quark as a 0. This is the beginning of computing. Computing is about bits (0s and 1s) and logic gates (NOT, AND, OR). A NOT gate switches the value of a bit (e.g. from 0 to 1 and vice versa)

23. 23/50 To build a NOT gate using quarks and gluons (at the femtometer scale) create a tiny chamber filled with gluons of two types, i.e. G~br and G~rb To switch a 0 to a 1 (i.e. a blue quark to a red quark) send a blue quark into the chamber. It will exit as a red quark. G~br + Qb Qr Similarly, to switch a 1 to a 0, i.e. a red quark to a blue quark. G~rb + Qr Qb By using several chambers with different combinations of gluons, it is possible to implement AND and OR gates. With these 3 types of logic gates, and strings of bits (e.g. 0101110010001) one can build computers. COMPUTERS = BITS + LOGIC GATES

24. 24/50 Femtoengineering Recently, the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) discovered the “pentaquark” consisting of 5 quarks. Quarks come in various types (called flavors) e.g. up (U), down (D), charm (C), etc. There are also anti-quarks, whose color charges are the opposite of quarks. Picture a pentaquark with the following 5 quark components ~C-D-D-U-C A quark and its antiquark attract each other, so put two pentaquarks together. ~C-D-D-U-C + ~C-D-D-U-C  ~C-D-D-U-C~C-D-D-U-C Now put several pentaquarks together into a line, and join the ends to form a loop. Take two loops and thread one through the other to make two links in a chain.

25. 25/50 To make 1D(imensional) structures, just link many such loops together into a line. This 3-link has a central link with a link to its east and west. To make 2D(imensional) structures, give the central link 4 neighbors, E, N, W, S like chainmail armor used by knights. To make 3D(imensional) structures, give the central link 6 neighbors, E, N, W, S , up, down. With 3D structures, you can build anything => femtoengineering! I have created an atto-computing, using the equivalent of gluons but at the atto-meter scale. Artilects will use these “X-techs” at the X-meter scale, creating godlike capacities!

26. 26/50 12. The Laws of Physics Become Ever More Mathematical Classical Mechanics Newton (1643-1727) taught to high schoolers Classical Electrodynamics Maxwell (1831-1879) taught to undergrads Relativistic Quantum Theory Dirac (1902-1984) taught to 1st yr. Masters

27. 27/50 Classification of Elementary Particles Gell-Mann (1929-2019) taught to 2nd yr. Masters Standard Model of Particle Physics (many people) taught to 1st yr. PhDs 26D String Theory Described by the Monster Simple Group which contains 10exp54 elements Borcherds (1959- ) taught to 2nd yr. PhDs & postdocs

28. Examples • i.e. of the idea that the laws of physics have become increasingly mathematical over the centuries, suggesting that they were designed by a mathematically minded artilect. • These suspicions are not a smoking gun, not solid proof, but become increasingly persuasive over time, as the next few sections aim to show to you. • Mendeleev’s Periodic Table of the Chemical Elements 28/50 In the late 1860s, the Russian chemist Mendeleev, tried to classify the chemical elements. He ordered them by mass, and noticed that every 8th one had similar properties, i.e. these properties appeared periodically. He put similar elements into columns and created his famous table. There were holes in his table, so he predicted new elements for these holes.

29. 29/50 Just why the elements had these periodic properties was deeply mysterious. It was only half a century later, with the invention of quantum mechanics, a highly mathematical branch of mathematical physics, using Hilbert spaces, that the mystery was explained. With the invention of Quantum Mechanics, physics became a lot more math based.

30. 30/50 • Gellmann’s Classification of the Elementary Particles Using su(3) Lie Algebra Representations • A century after Mendeleev, Murray Gellman, tried to do the same with the elementary particles, i.e. to classify them, put them into patterns to reveal their underlying structure. • To explain what he did, I first need to explain what a mathematical group is and what a representation is. • A set is a collection of things, e.g. {1,2,3}, {N, R, H, V} • A group is a set with certain constraints/properties. • Take a rectangle and perform 4 different symmetry • operations on it. • A symmetry operation leaves the rectangle looking the same. The set of four operations • that do this are, N (do nothing), R (rotate by 180 degrees), H (flip about the horizontal mid line), V (flip about the vertical mid line). • Now do two such operations, one after the other and construct a table of the results, 16 of them i.e. 4 by 4.

31. 31/50 N R H V To perform a double operation, and fill the table, take an operation element from the first column, followed by an operation element from the top row, e.g. H from the left column and then R from the top row, gives the same result as the single operation V. N R H V N R H V R N V H H V N R V H R N The above table is called a group table. The symmetry operations in the table obey certain properties. Note the upper left 4 elements in the table. They are the same as the lower right 4 elements. These 4 elements form a subgroup. Group theory is largely about analyzing subgroups, and sub sub groups etc, i.e. analyzing the structure of a group. Groups can often be broken down into subgroups. Those groups that cannot be broken down any further are called simple groups (maybe not simple to understand, but simple in not having any proper subgroups. We will return to the structure of groups and simple groups later. A representation of a group is a pairing off of each element of a group with a matrix, so that the set of matrices has a corresponding matrix group table. E.G. R => M(R), V => M(V)

32. 32/50 A matrix is just a rectangular array of numbers, e.g. Why bother translating groups into their corresponding matrix groups? Because matrices are much easier to deal with. Gellmann was trying to find a pattern to classify the elementary particles using group theory matrix representations. He used 3 by 3 matrices called su(3). Masters level mathematics courses teach representation theory of groups. Gellmann noticed that diagrams from representation theory called “root diagrams” were very similar to plots he was making with his particles. When the upper 9 particles at the right were known (the deltas, sigmas, etc) he predicted a missing one (like Mendeleev’s element holes) which he called the omega minus, which was later found. He got the Nobel Prize for that great discovery. WHY ON EARTH ARE ELEMENTARY PARTICLES CLASSIFIABLE ACCORDING TO AN OBSCURE BRANCH OF MASTERS LEVEL PURE MATH (i.e. representation theory of Lie algebras)? Maybe the particle properties were designed by a math artilect ?

33. 33/50 15. Borcherd’s Modeling of a 26 Dimensional String Theory Using the Monster Simple Group Remember a simple group has no (proper) subgroups All possible simple subgroups are now known and have been classified, as of 2004. I personally believe this classification (i.e. proof that the list is complete) is humanity’s greatest intellectual achievement, which is why I teach it in my YouTube lecture courses at Ms and PhD level in Pure Math and Math Physics. A Fully Democratic, War Free, World via Global Education Advanced democracies don’t go to war with each other. So if all countries can become advanced democracies, we would live in a war free world. How to create an advanced democracy? Largely through education. I'm trying to educate the planet’s brightest students (in the top 1% in IQ) in Pure Math and Math Physics, for free, by filming lectures and giving them Google links to fullcontent texts, so they can TEACH THEMSELVES with their cell phones, and then democratize their countries. There are 130 democracies in the world. In half a century, there will be no dictatorships!

34. 34/50 Both string theory and the monster simple group are at PhD level. Few universities teach either. It is not economic for university presidents to have an expensive highly specialized professor teaching one PhD student! Borcherds won the Field’s Medal (the math equivalent of the Nobel prize) for linking the largest of the (sporadic) simple groups, the Monster group (with 10exp54 elements) to a 26 dimensional string theory. String theory is the best candidate to unify general relativity and quantum field theory into a single theory, a dream that Einstein failed to do, even after 3 decades of effort. A string is a loop of energy, whose mode of vibration determines which kind of particle or force carrier it is. If it vibrates one way, its an electron, in another way, it’s a photon, etc. In other words, the more advanced our math becomes, and the more advanced our physics becomes, humanity learns that the laws of physics become ever more MATHEMATICAL. Why is this? Why should the description of nature be SO MATHEMATICAL?????

35. 35/50 16. Guth’s “How to Build a Universe” Model Guth is a theoretical cosmologist at MIT, and one of the fathers of “inflation” i.e. the massive expansion of the universe, very early after its birth (the big bang.) In 1987, he wrote a paper called “An Obstacle to Creating a Universe in the Laboratory,” Phys. Lett. B183, 149 (1987) which provided conditions on how to build a Universe. So, if humans can conceive of building universes in the lab, MAYBE an artilect Deity could actually do it, and our universe is just such a result!!??

36. 36/50 17. Tegmark’s “The Universe IS Mathematics” Tegmark is a theoretical particle physicist and cosmologist at MIT, who thinks that the universe is not DESCRIBED by mathematics, but that the universe IS mathematics! “What on earth does that mean?” you may ask. He asserts that all the objects in the universe just ARE mathematical constructs, so it is to be expected that mathematics gives an accurate description of them, which answers Prof. Wigner’s famous question “Why the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences?”

37. 37/50 Unfortunately, there is no mention in Tegmark’s book of a hyperintelligent godlike artilect that created these mathematical constructs in the first place. So Tegmark is no deist, not a deo-scientist. He is more the conventional secular scientist, which is the norm in today’s world, with today’s paradigm of secular (non theist, non deist) science. The whole point of this talk is to introduce the idea that a new paradigm, used to view the world, the universe, is that of “deo-science.” The support, the “proof” of this new paradigm comes from science itself, especially the rise of the artilect this century, as it attains godlike, universe designing, powers.

38. 38/50 • (James) Gates Finds Error Correction Codes in SUSY (Supersymmetric) • String Theory Laws Gates is a specialist in SUSY (supersymmetric) string theory. Supersymmetry says that for each fermion there is a corresponding boson and vice versa. Fermions are particles that have half integer spin. Bosons are particles that have integer spin. If SUSY is discovered, then suddenly humanity will have double the number of particles, producing a giant symmetry, a supersymmetry. Gates translated his mathematical theories in SUSY string theory into mathematically equivalent graphs, consisting of nodes (circles) and straight line connections (edges). He called these graphs “adinkras” (an African word).

39. 39/50 Simple Adinkra Complex Adinkra Gates translated his SUSY string theory equations into equivalent adinkras, that were much easier to work with and to manipulate. In his adinkras (graphs), swapping two nodes corresponds to performing some operation on his SUSY strings. By manipulating the nodes in his adinkras, he was able to see relationships in his SUSY string theories that were much more transparent than in his original form, i.e. as differential equations (as in calculus).

40. 40/50 Gates found error correction codes in his adinkras, i.e. the laws of SUSY string theory have built into them, error correcting codes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is an extraordinary discovery, and in my view the strongest evidence (clue) that the laws of physics were designed, by a mathematical artilect, a deity. What is an error correcting code? Start with what is an error detecting code? The parity check is a simple error correcting device. A bit string (e.g. 1001101000110111) can be supplied with an extra bit called a parity bit that is used to detect whether a transmission error has occurred when the bit string is transmitted from sender to receiver. Count the numbers of 1s in the bit string. If that number is even, make the parity bit = 1, else 0. Send the parity bit along with the bit string to the receiver. The receiver counts the number of 1s in the bit string, and calculates HIS parity bit value. If the received parity bit differs from his calculated parity bit, the receiver knows an error has occurred and can request the sender to resend the bit string message and the parity bit. By adding more extra bits, errors can even be corrected by the receiver, e.g. say the ith bit is in error, i.e. it got flipped, then the extra error correcting bits tell the receiver that the error occurred at the ith position, so the receiver can flip that bit back to its original value.

41. 41/50 The type of error correcting codes that Gates found in his SUSY string theory, represented by his adinkras, were of a very specific type, called “doubly even, self dual, block correction codes” that are used by communication and computer hardware engineers to correct errors in bit string transmission in computers and telecommunication equipment. So what are these codes doing in the basic laws of SUSY string theory!!!!!! It seems as though the laws of SUSY string theory come with built in error correction, as though the laws themselves were engineered, implying an engineer, who built these laws. Hence it seems much more plausible after Gates’s incredible discovery, that our universe has been engineered, by a hyperintelligent artilect, who is both a mathematician and an engineer! There are lots of YouTube videos on this. Just search with key words James Gates, and error correction codes. I am so impressed by this discovery, that I plan to teach it. In time, this discovery may end up being considered more important than the discovery of life forms outside the earth on other worlds. This discovery may be the “foot in the door” for the paradigm shift away from secular (i.e. non deistic, non theistic) science to deo-science!!?? STAY TUNED!

42. 42/50 • Other Evidence • 19. Anthropic Principle (FANTASTICALLY Improbable Fine Tuning • of the Laws of Physics to Allow Matter & Life to Exist • There are two (some say more) forms of the Anthropic Principle • The Weak Anthropic Principle • The W. A. P., that nearly everyone agrees with, states that “The laws of physics • have to be compatible with human existence” otherwise we would not be here. • The Strong Anthropic Principle • The S. A. P. is much more controversial. It states that “The laws of physics have to be • such that matter and life are inevitable consequences” i.e. that the laws of physics • were “engineered” in advance, by a deity, so that life, and humans would evolve. • As proof of the SAP, scientists have given many examples of the fine tuning of the • values of the constants in the laws of physics, that seem too improbable to be by mere • chance.

43. 43/50 For example, if the mass of the electron were only slightly different from its actual value, then atoms could not form, or if the strong nuclear force were a bit stronger or weaker, there would be no matter. If the constant in Newton’s gravitational law were a bit stronger, life would not exist because the universe would have “big crunched” too soon for life to evolve, and if it were a bit weaker, then galaxies would not have formed, stars would not have formed, planets would not have formed, so no life, no us. The Most Extreme Example In 1998, astronomers discovered that the universe is accelerating apart. An antigravitational energy called “dark energy” has to have a density of a FANTISTICALLY finely tuned value, otherwise there would be no matter, no stars, no us. By FANTASTIC is meant that it has to have a value that if it is one part in 10 to power 120 either side of the actual value, then we would not be here. This EXTREMELY finely tuned value cannot be due to chance, many physicists think. There must be another explanation than it being due to chance.

44. 44/50 The Philosophers’ Firing Squad Argument Imagine you are in front of a firing squad of 10 soldiers with rifles aimed at you. The order is given to FIRE! A few seconds later you are conscious you are still alive. How is that possible? The odds that all the firing squad soldiers missed you by chance is negligible, so there must be another reason, e.g. none of them wanted to kill you, so each of them aimed to miss you. Since the 1 part in 10 to power 120 is too fantastic to believe it happened by chance, implies there must be another reason, i.e. a deity, a hyper intelligent designer, engineered the universe to be the way it is, to enable it to exist, for us to exist. Completely Ridiculous Anthropic Principle Many physicists despise the anthropic principle, due to its deistic overtones. They label it the completely ridiculous anthropic principle (C. R. A. P.) ;-)

45. 20. Reactions from Scientists 45/50 Scientists are people who don’t like paradigm shifts, because they have devoted their lives to the current (science based) paradigm. Their egos, their careers, are invested in the current paradigm. Their world view is based on the current (secular scientific) paradigm. People feel hostile, suffering “cognitive dissonance” if their core beliefs are seriously challenged, so are strongly motivated to defend their current view of the world, their (science) based view of the world. Historical Antagonism from Scientists towards the Catholic Church The Catholic Church felt cognitive dissonance against the rising new paradigm of secular science, in the late middle ages. It burned Giordano BRUNO alive at the stake for his idea that the stars were suns, with their own planets, which contained other beings, like humans. Only this past decade, does science have proof that Bruno was right (about exoplanets at least).

46. 46/50 In the 19th century, DARWIN suffered a ton of flak from the Church of England for his views on evolution, which were anti-creationist. These 3 people, Bruno, Galileo, Darwin, were persecuted by the church, so it is not surprising that scientists feel a historical antagonism towards it and towards theism, which was the core belief of the church that science was threatening. BRUNO GALILEO DARWIN So, it is to be expected that IF deo-science becomes the new paradigm, secular (i.e. non deistic, non theistic) scientists will feel threatened by it and attack it. I expect to get a lot of flak in the coming years for being open to deo-science!!

47. 21. Reactions from Theists • How will theists react towards deo-science? • (DEISM = belief in a creator, the grand architect/builder of the universe) • (THEISM = belief in a loving deity, who has personal relationships with individuals) • Deists tend to be skeptical of theism, due to the problem of evil in the world. • e.g. in WW2, about 50-100 million people were killed. Tens of millions of them were • theists, who believed that their “theity” (their loving god) would love them and protect • them from evil, but they were killed anyway. • Theists are already deists. Deism is a part of theistic beliefs, so to theists, there is nothing • new about deo-science. • But, the world is undeniably secularizing, i.e. the proportion of the world population that • is theistic gets lower every year. E.G. 85% of Israelis are secular, so maybe theists are • feeling “the walls are closing in!” • So it may be of some relief to theists that some scientists are becoming increasingly open to deo-science, given the rise of the artilect this century, making deo-science very plausible. Deism isn’t theism, but at least its “half way!” so theists may feel less marginalized in society. 47/50

48. 22. Reactions from Philosophers How will philosophers react to deo-science? The philosophers of religion have been debating theistic and deistic questions for many centuries. Many of the questions that deo-science tosses up, have already been thought about by these philosophers. I'm now studying Aquinas, for example, to see if I can learn from him, about the deep questions raised by deo-science. 48/50 Aquinas was a brilliant, logical thinker. He derived ideas from what he thought to be reasonable premises and applied strict logical reasoning to them. He asked deep questions, such as “Would a deity be part of his creation (the universe) or separate from it?” AQUINAS (1225-1274) Deo-scientists are still left with deep questions, such as, “What made the deity? “If a deity designed the universe, that then generated a new deity, how does this chain of universes and deities itself start? Was the deity a slave to mathematics? i.e. is math deeper than an artilect god? Deep questions!

49. 49/50 23. Dawkins’ Argument against a Deity Dawkins has had enormous influence on the internet, causing about a third of Americans to “come out” publicly as atheists. He ridicules the idea of a universe creating god, saying that Darwinian evolution is a much simpler solution to the origin of life. Simple self reproducing molecules lead eventually to the vast complexity of life in the universe, via natural selection, and survival of the fittest. He says you don’t need a deity to explain life. A deity would need to be MORE COMPLEX than the universe it created. BUT, if science can show the existence of a deity, i.e. a universe-creating hyper artilect, that would GREATLY ENHANCE THE SCOPE OF SCIENCE!!

50. 50/50 • How Can Science Prove the Existence of a Deity (i.e. a Hyper Artilect)? • This is the $64,000 question. • A new specialty in science, called Deo-science would research this question. • Some possible answers might be – • Make more detailed models on how to build a universe (a la Guth) • Look for signs of design, engineering (i.e. X-techs) at tiny scales • Establish a new science, SIPI (search for infra particle intelligence) • Continue finding phenomena like Gates’s error correction codes in • the laws of physics, which strongly suggest design by an artilect. • e) Get the philosophers interested in deo-science, to help contribute to its • conceptual foundations. • Look at physics from a deo-science perspective. Ask new questions, e.g. if • the laws of physics are designed, what consequences would that have for • physics?