I'll re-post my 'beyond math' stuff here, with additional comments to bring it up to date:
The universe doesn't need someone labelling it to obey the 1 + 0 = 1 rule; but it does need to EXIST. Christians just call "Existence" God, and say He is Three Persons in One Being.
If you analyse what exactly must occur for a '1' to occur, if you analyse the basis of number and math (how the sq. rt of -1 works gives a big clue); then you find that the logic underlying math does flow from 'Existence' (which you seem to acknowledge).
The question then isn't "does the universe need someone pointing a finger at it to behave according to 1 + 0 = 1 rule"; but "Does the universe need to exist in order to exist and obey that rule?" (obviously "Yes"); and "Is 'Existence'
a 3-in-1 BEING that provides the basic boundary of distinctness that allows '1's to be distinct from other '1's? (and thus not labelled, just 'let be').
As I mentioned before, no one has reduced life to just chemical reactions (see "The Fifth Miracle" by Paul Davies. That book shows a huge problem: 'specific randomness'). Further, no one has reduced 'social living' in the way you describe.
Claiming that social behaviour is the result of brain chemistry, is speculation, well discredited by prof. Thomas Szasz in books like "Insanity, The Idea and Its Consequences". Similarly a novel written on a computer IS NOT the result of the computer electronics, but of an outside dimension (the planning of the author). Pull apart the computer- you may find quantum mechanics, but learn nothing of the story.
Trying to dismantle a TV set because one is trying to solve a mystery programme would be irrational.
Similarly it does not follow that brain chemistry explains social behaviour. Human beings are moral agents responsible for their behaviour. They make guesses about regularities in their environment and actively interact with it, making hypotheses and pursuing goals etc.
No one has shown biology to fully reduce to chemistry. And certainly no one has reduced social behaviour to chemistry.
In answer to Mark: it is not an unfair analogy. You are right that we COULD study the WHOLE system (not just the TV or computer electronics) - that is exactly what I did (Five Potentially Dangerous Experiments)- and your comment allows me to claim to Luis that what I did WAS a necessary scientific enterprise to cover the WHOLE story.
The Uncertainty Principle is based on statistical averages; it does not apply to a single measurement on a single particle (according to Heinz R. Pagels, physicist).
Since the uncertainty has meaning only if you repeat measurements; this leaves the possibility open that not only are quantum fluctuations actually evidence of a 'false-zero picture' based on say three compensating accelerations; but reality may be uniquely created with each 'fluctuation'. Consider also: www.biols.susx.ac.uk/home/John_Gribbin/
click on 'other interesting sites'
click on 'the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics'
Reality is unpredictable because it is free and created; when you are in harmony/ agreement with the Creator though, your future feels very secure
(just as once you agree on the rules of a game, your future is secure compared to a game of unknown rules).
I have found a 'map' for not only physics, but more basic than math; and from which even evolution, cosmology, religion issues, biology, all sorts of knowledge, seems to be explainable by. This suggests that not math; but the system beneath math that I found, may fulfill Roger Penrose's wish to find a key insight that appears to be missing.
Here's a brief idea of the system:
Map is: Three complementary 'jump event fields' (quantum fields?) (I call simply 'musical chairs). One field has the effect of 'joining the dots' between two other 'musical chairs' fields; the key is to 'know the difference' between 'musical chairs' and 'join the dots'. A classic pattern is three ‘musical chairs’ fields and a matched-pattern between the three gives you a new dimension, a new phenomenon, a new ‘jump event field’.
The difference (relativity) between two quantum acceleration (jump- change per change per change) fields may turn out to be another 'musical chairs' (quantum acceleration) type field. (Thus a theory of quantum relativity, quantum acceleration, quantum gravity). Physicists would note the 'join the dots field' is 'at right angles' / different dimension to/ relative to; the 'musical chairs' field. 'Know the difference' may include 'know the relativity'.
You might think of it as three complementary quantum-accelerations (effectively we have here a quantum-gravity (acceleration) scenario that produces all the other quantum phenomena.)
So instead of looking for a quantum-gravity therory to fit qm; we start with a qa (quantum acceleration) (so includes gravity) scenario that generates qm.
Just as you can not know the position (one note) of music, and experience its flow (momentum) at the same time; momentum can only be a statistical notion involving several positions, when position jumps from one distinct spot to another. Hence the statistical "Heisenberg Uncertainty principle".
To exist is to be distinct; so reality is made of distinctions. To be distinct is to be a change in the background. Existent must have boundary (b1) compared as different (boundary 2 dimension) from background or other reference-existent (with boundary b3). Effectively a three-way agreement on boundary demarcation, clarifies the existence of the phenomenon. God is Existence, the agreement/ love between existent phenomena that preserves their distinctness (existence),
Creation is all good; evil vanishes when evasion/obfuscation of boundary patterns stops.