[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What's for certain is that we probably agree that the plausibility of a final god of sorts is illogical.

[/ QUOTE ]

The plausability of a final god of sorts is as logical as it gets. The fact is that man is not intelligent enough to disprove God. It might also be true that the constraints of physics may never allow even the most intelligent physical creature that one can imagine the abilty to disprove the existence of God.

pokervintage

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not disproving the existence of a Omega-type intelligence. Such should exist. Their evolution, or his if you will, would never be final due to infinite evolution/regression. There's always a next question, next answer, growth.

As those intelligences progress, they grow. There's no such thing as a final eschaton. Look at the Biblical kingdom of God as the universe itself, and you realize humanity's only just started to grow and spread life and intelligence through the universe.

We haven't solved Fermi's Paradox yet, and there's a good chance we mightn't for eons, but you can hypothesize a resolution in which life elsewhere is going through the same stages in different levels of development.

And such a concept is staggeringly large, because it is a growing infinity. And this universe is only 13.7 billion years old and there are only a hundred odd elements (which should logically allow for the properties of life's emergence elsewhere since the elements are finite and so are the possible combinations in a finite set) and we've yet to colonize a single solar system. As far as we know, the Solar System is ours to grow into, and we'll progress beyond. I'm optimistic about that.

A top-level intelligence would never be individual, but likely collective. As for the question of how things came into being, it's simple. Mathematics and logic go beyond a single universe, at least on paper, and there are laws. There was a single big bang. It may not have been the first, but one in a sequence of them. Perhaps there were previous universes. That's also unanswerable.

And that's the crux. There's always an unanswerable question, and the succession is perpetual. The question is whether it's for us to evolve and get there, or others have already and are observing our development as redundancy.

By computing and biological standards, we have yet begun to start directing our own development consciously. But we have modified our planet to meet our needs, not necessarily in the best ways.

There's a lot of time for all these things. Even if the universe is finite, mathematics shows infinity is a provable logical concept. It's no coincidence as we grow, we discover these things.