Order vs. Randomness

[Alex K]

Does mathematics capture the essence of everything that goes on in the universe?

Perhaps it doesn't, but I think that many people (especially physicists) believe that to be the case, i.e. that the essence of the universe can be best explained by mathematics. That's why they toil with complex equations and things like M-theory and all that kind of stuff in hopes of being able to find a "Theory of Everything" (TOE). The more they study physics, the more they discover mathematical regularities, which are essentially patterns in a mathematical realm.

Being one who works in related fields, I would agree that this is what some colleagues feel, especially the more they are related to the mathematical faculty. I also know some string theorists who would not insist that the Superstring is the ultimate theory which is one with the universe. I don't see a reason why the Superstring, even if it should at some level be a correct theory of quantum gravity and fundamental particles and interactions, should be the absolute end point any more than other currently testable theories such as the Standard Model. Historically, such hopes were always unfounded.

But I think that these patterns themselves are real, and I equate them as only vague aspects of a universal "mind" or "intelligence" behind everything since even our own self-aspects such knowledge, understanding, self-awareness, and emotions are essentially nothing but specific patterns unfolding in spacetime, while spacetime itself is a mathematical structure.

Ok, I don't know whether they are real (on some days I'm a mathematical Platonist, on other days I'm not) but let's say it is so for the sake of argument.
Why then intelligence? Even with scare quotes, what justifies it?

And these networks of patterns which create our self-awareness are probably already embedded everywhere at the most fundamental level or reality (or maybe in a mathematical realm only), and if so then perhaps we don't really "own" our consciousness, as we think we do. The consciousness is everywhere, and we are just receiving some of it through our own patterns in spacetime.

I get that idea, I don't think it is so. We know many examples where we control the rules of a "game", and choose them to be extremely simple, and can observe emergent complexity. Think of the game of life with a certain size field. There is complete control over the rules, and they are just two instructions. Would you say that all possible resulting life-like complexity you get out of it if you start with all possible initial conditions (*) is encoded in those two simple algorithmic rules to the extent that these two rules are identical with these complex "worlds" which can result from them? I just don't think it is sensible to equate the two.

(*) I consider the union of all these games, thus eliminating the information content in any specific initial condition from the argument, reminiscent of many worlds QM