First of all I did not realize Amandan had a position at Oxford. I doubt if he would bother with a forum, especially this one.

Next it became abundantly apparent from the paper that Amandan thinks symmetries control reality. He argues that the probabilities, which he later claims indicate a lack of intelligent design, that those microscopic probabilities are controlled by symmetries- second paragraph on page two of his paper. But he does not actually use the words "no intelligent design to the universe" until page 16 of 17 text pages. And just before that he points out that "if there is one finite dimensional group that determines all interactions then that would constitute a law".

So for him everything, whether law or randomness, comes from symmetry. It was always my contention that DoctorDick's universal laws came from symmetry. So I can well understand that DoctorDick's opinion was in disagreement with Amadan's paper leading to the disconnect with Helen or eva or whomever.

Personally I disagree with Amandan as well since an intelligent design could be of symmetry and not necesarily law. Law implies predetermination whereas probability implies human choice. I even claim that prophecy such as in the Book of Revelation is of all the possibilities since we find contradictory prophecies in Revelations.
Besides my own personal experience suggests that an intelliegent being or beings is using coincidence to guide the universe.

yanniru