&gt; I don&#x27;t think the author is arguing that mathematics allows for creating reality from nothing but that anything that resembles reality behaves mathematically and thus can transform into new situations with new mechanics (or realities).<p>I&#x27;m not sure I follow. What does &quot;transform into new situations&quot; really mean?<p>&gt; We can construct an infinite number of consistent mathematical realities but only by comparing their predictions to our reality can we resolve which reality is our own.<p>If this is really what he meant, I appreciate the correction. If it would have been clear from the text, I would have proceeded with pointing out with pointing out the dodgy assumptions that underly the finetuning problem, but that would be even more like arguing against a deist&#x2F;theist.