Look, if that makes you feel better to ascribe beliefs to me, knock yourself out.
Of course evidence can support a hypothesis, the point is whether you’re asking a question that has any scientific meaning to our actual understanding of reality.
While just about any hypothesis may be true, as possible as the Eiffel Tower, as possible as an invisible Unicorn no one can detect, this one has no truly testable property and ultimately no predictive power, and it’s defined to be that way. So it is a great philosophy question, an interesting exercise, but there’s nothing there beyond that.
Sometimes I wonder if it’s some kind of emergent behavior that naturally arises on top of some kind of mathematical substrate…maybe some sort of simple formula or algorithm that exists that generates all the complicated emergent stuff by itself. Not a simulation as such.
Sir Roger Penrose says that we do need the quantum indeterminism in order to have consciousness, otherwise we’re just clockwork…or something like that.
As for who created mathematics, there are those who think it is invented/created by humans, and there are those who think it is logical necessity (hence not needing a creator), and discovered. I’m with Tegmark.
Not one of his finest arguments. He thinks our brains can decide non-computable (Godel-undecidable) statements, therefore our brains must be quantum. Or that conscious is mysterious, and quantum theory is mysterious, therefore… It’s Deepak Chopra level stuff, really.
