Of origins

Speaking to the origins of our own existence and the possibility of creation, and the potential creator(s) it implies, is a discourse that frequently degrades into theological arguments. This is especially true with reductionist methods such as these. Therefore we will simply accept all theology as a formation of this existence, another complexity among innumerable, and move forward with logical analysis free of preconceived constructs of God(s), religion, and worship To infer the presence of creation, that being some sort of intelligent design, we must ask how was an infinitely simple existence structured? Several possibilities exist but the relatively important issue to consider would be the quantity and distribution of source materials. An organized quantity and distribution would clearly indicate some level of preconceived design (consilio informatum); but if one substance was predominant before a second substance was somehow introduced, this may be more indicative of a “Big Bang”, design without method. Neither precludes any sort of creator(s) involvement but demonstrates a clearly different method of design, and also the extent of control a creator(s) may exercise over this existence. Neither precludes the possibility that our existence is an an emergent property of an existence outside our own, therefore not perceivable, occurring without creative intent and therefore without a creator(s).Unfortunately, without being omnipresent, it is likely impossible to determine how an infinitely simple existence was structured though means of logical reduction; thus making it impossible for complexities of our level to make a determination as to the control or presence of a creator(s) though this logic. However this is expected, as a creator of this existence would, by its very nature, exist outside of it. A creator cannot be governed by the rules of its creation before the creation exists. For example, if this existence operates much like an automated computer program; without a sudden input/act of a user/creator(s) to suddenly change the computer's operation, we would continue operating oblivious to the fact our existence is merely an automated operation within a computer. However this does leave open the possibility to prove the existence of a creator(s) through what might be called "an act of God"f for some reason the laws that govern our existence are broken by an “act of God”, then the chain of interactions that result in the Law of Infinite Complexity would also be broken. As such, even if such an act occurred, it may be unlikely we would notice; since it would require the entire structure of existence to be reformed to incorporate the change. If we were perceptually aware of the change through the alteration of something like the laws of physics, this then would indicate a creator(s) level of omnipotence. We cannot know the laws that govern the world outside our own existence, the world a creator(s) exist in, if any such constants exist at all. As such, there may be variations on the power of a creator(s) beyond the standard accepted “God” model.A creator may be omnipotent, omnipresent, or omniscient; the final being both omnipresent and omnipotent. If a creator is like that of a standard computer user, then he may not be aware of all active processes at any given time but have full control to cease them individually or completely; thus being omnipotent but not omnipresent. Similarly a creator may be aware of every active process but may be unable to interfere with the activity due to the rules that govern his world, such as the inability to alter the physical construction of a computer while the operating system is running due to complete instability and operation breakdown that would occur; thus being omnipresent but not omnipotent. Lastly the creator may be omniscient, having full awareness and full control to alter all activities within the system at will