Learning about crossovers helped convert me from atheist to a believer in God

You high?

you down?

😁😊

Sorry for you.... Keep hope and think...

The OP addressed the question at the metaphysical level, and the discussion should have stayed there. OP merely rehashes the tired argument from design. Well, the beauty of symmetry and predictability of physical laws don't imply a designer, and the "randomness" and "alternative universes" oppositions are straw men long since burned down. Either matter and energy will exist or they won't. As it happens, they do, so to speak of nothingness is to speak idly. So if existence is the case, that which exists will express the laws necessary to its existence and behavior, including the interconvertibility of matter and energy. We humans, extreme latecomers to this universe existing for billions of earth years before our arrival, whose existence was made possible only by temporary conditions on one obscure planet (out of perhaps a decillion others about which we know little or nothing), NATURALLY find beauty in the symmetries of mathematics, electricity, gravity, magnetism, etc., because we are creatures of those forces. Just as children love their parents, we all love the natural world IN WHICH, AND ALONG WITH WHICH, WE COEVOLVED. How could we not find it beautiful?  If there were a designer, then how come we humans capable of appreciating this "design" were a mere afterthought in the nature of an asterisk on a footnote arriving after eternities of astrophysical wonders beyond comprehension? Yet mathematical truths, like gravity, were there all along, just with nobody around (that we know of) to declare them beautiful or symmetrical or harmonious or mysterious.

Great post!

The peroblem in your post is that you suppose a separation , a dualism , between matter and consciousness,  BUT this Cartesian dualism died with quantum mechanics...

His death was analysed and predicted by Alfred North Whitehead, he called it the Cartesian bifurcation , and call the unability to be conscious of this bifurcation of tought  and his consequences a fallacy;  "one commits the fallacy of misplaced concreteness when one mistakes an abstract belief, opinion, or concept about the way things are for a physical or "concrete" reality"...

When men think that an outer material substance is more real than their own thought process and consciousness...This outer substance is a reified abstraction called "matter"... Heisenberg put it at rest for eternity... After him man must distinguishe as the physicist Wolfgang Smith described : sub physical abstraction of physics with phenomenal corporeal qualitative reality and vertical transcendant spiritual reality...

The OP addressed the question at the metaphysical level, and the discussion should have stayed there. OP merely rehashes the tired argument from design. Well, the beauty of symmetry and predictability of physical laws don’t imply a designer, and the "randomness" and "alternative universes" oppositions are straw men long since burned down. Either matter and energy will exist or they won’t. As it happens, they do, so to speak of nothingness is to speak idly. So if existence is the case, that which exists will express the laws necessary to its existence and behavior, including the interconvertibility of matter and energy. We humans, extreme latecomers to this universe existing for billions of earth years before our arrival, whose existence was made possible only by temporary conditions on one obscure planet (out of perhaps a decillion others about which we know little or nothing), NATURALLY find beauty in the symmetries of mathematics, electricity, gravity, magnetism, etc., because we are creatures of those forces. Just as children love their parents, we all love the natural world IN WHICH, AND ALONG WITH WHICH, WE COEVOLVED. How could we not find it beautiful? If there were a designer, then how come we humans capable of appreciating this "design" were a mere afterthought in the nature of an asterisk on a footnote arriving after eternities of astrophysical wonders beyond comprehension? Yet mathematical truths, like gravity, were there all along, just with nobody around (that we know of) to declare them beautiful or symmetrical or harmonious or mysterious.

All i can add is Ockham’s razor. Belief is a category of knowledge that does not admit to discussion in a meaningful way as we understand it. The theologians of yesterday tried their proofs and indirectly contributed to the secularization of the world.it is indeed an interesting phenomenon (sentience),all of this. It could well have been nothing. For fun think of a world without the universal consciousness of language, or specifically as it applies to you, and your opposable thumbs and build from there over a long time frame. I studied for a European doctorate in linguistic philosophy.