Is there a god

The claim 'Information represents objective reality.' is in huge contradiction with Brian Whitworth's paper since he states - ' The virtual reality model contradicts physical realism but not philosophical realism: that there is a real world “out there” generating experiences.' and later - 'In modern physics, it seems increasingly unlikely that the world is an objective reality.'Well-known prominent physicists essentially agree with Brian’s conclusion that all the evidence shows how information is fundamental. In addition, they said that there is no evidence against this claim. Here is the introduction to the video: "As computers become progressively faster and more powerful, they’ve gained the impressive capacity to simulate increasingly realistic environments. Which raises a question familiar to aficionados of The Matrix—might life and the world as we know it be a simulation on a super advanced computer? “Digital physicists” have developed this idea well beyond the sci-fi possibilities, suggesting a new scientific paradigm in which computation is not just a tool for approximating reality, but is also the basis of reality itself. In place of elementary particles, think bits; in place of fundamental laws of physics, think computer algorithms." If ideas came first, then then the mind is limitless, and we would be able to think anything. But our own experience shows that our thoughts are limited by reality, because physical objects exist in the reality of space-time. We cannot think of what doesn't exist, therefore our ideas are shaped under our perception of the objects in the real world.A 2013 poll suggested that most quantum physicists believe that the observer plays a fundamental role in the practical application of mathematical formulas and they believe these formulas ontologically exist in a objective way. Just read question 9 and 10:https://archive.org... "Information needs matter for its embodiment and energy for its communication, since we create ideas in our perceptions of physical objects, therefore ideas come after reality. Reality exists prior to our own observation or interpretation."That's not what experiments in quantum physics show us. "....the values that you obtain when you measure its properties depend on the [observer's knowledge of the system]. So the value of property A, say, depends on whether you chose to measure it with property B, or with property C. In other words, there is no reality independent of the choice of measurement". https://www.newscientist.com...As the researcher who conducted the experiment concluded:“There is no sense in assuming that what we do not measure about a system has [an independent] reality,” Experiments in quantum physics have also confirmed that the macro-world of general relativity emerges and is built by the micro world of quantum physics. This means that we cannot separate the two realms because quantum mechanics is ultimately fundamental [3]. In fact, a team of scientists have even succeeded in putting an object large enough to be visible to the naked eye into a mixed quantum state of moving and not moving [5]. These experiments show that the principles of quantum mechanics can apply to everyday objects as well as atomic-scale particles.[3] http://meetings.aps.org...[5]http://www.nature.com... Lawrence Krauss in his book Universe from nothing, have argued that a flat zero-energy universe and quantum physics show that it is not only possible, but quite likely, that our universe came from nothing.Many physicists including Krauss admiitted that this "nothing" they are refering to is actually a quantum mechanical wave-function, which is a mathematical abstract object that represents a possible configuration of matter or a universe. The reason why he calls it "nothing" is because it is not made out of space-time, matter, and energy but it is still real though:Sean M. Carroll asked, "Do advances in modern physics and cosmology help us address these underlying questions, of why there is something called the universe at all, and why there are things called 'the laws of physics,' and why those laws seem to take the form of quantum mechanics, and why some particular wave function and Hamiltonian? In a word: no. I don't see how they could."https://en.wikipedia.org...The physicist George F. R. Ellis noted that " Krauss does not address why the laws of physics exist, why they have the form they have, or in what kind of manifestation they existed before the universe existed (which he must believe if he believes they brought the universe into existence)."Thus, experiments in quantum physics show how Con's arguments actually supports why a mind creates or created physical reality:"No naive realistic picture is compatible with our results because whether a quantum could be seen as showing particle- or wave-like behavior would depend on a causally disconnected choice. It is therefore suggestive to abandon such pictures altogether". [emphasis added]"The argument made by my opponent in Omni-potent, Omniscient and Omnipresence, has nothing to do with a divine creator because of two simple facts, first, he is explaining something that doesn't require divine creator for its explanation, its just physics, and doing so with something more complex than what he is trying to explain. This is also what he is suggesting in Consciousness and Awareness part of the argument. For you to say that the fine tuning could only be possible by a work of God, you have to explain where the God came from, but then one can ask the question where does the creator of the creator came from, etc. Its a meaningless statement. "Yes, I do have to provide an explanation that ties everything together so here it is:Logical truths are considered to be necessarily true where they could not be untrue and no situation could arise which would cause us to reject a logical truth. It must be true in every sense of intuition, practices, and bodies of beliefs. In other words, logical truths are considered to be true in all possible worlds. These logical truths, such as the wave function and the genetic code, are grounded in God's nature as explained before. This means that God contains the reason and cause for his own existence just like John verses 1:1-3 suggests is the case. He not only exists in all possible worlds but he must or needs to exist in them since he is the only one that can create and sustain every possible world. This means that if God did not exist, Con would not even be able to ask the question "why does God exist?" in the first place. Therefore, we can conclude that God is an omnipotent/ omnipresent/ omniscient /eternal /necessary/ personal/immaterial/ spaceless timeless cause who is the creator and sustainer of our Universe.