http://www.letstalkphysics.com/2014/03/why-i-dont-believe-bostrom-or-tegmark.html

http://www.letstalkphysics.com/2010/02/problem-with-quantum-mechanics.html

There are three basic points in the essay:

- The universe must obey mathematical laws since there is no other possible source of structure.
- The mathematical laws that we see are plausibly the only ones compatible with life.
- Although it must be
*described*by mathematics (point #1), the universe cannot*be*a mathematical structure since the laws of quantum mechanics cannot be fully axiomatized.

If the universe is not a mathematical structure then it can not be viewed in the Tegmarkian way, as part of an eternal "mathematical multiverse". It must therefore be a singular "creation" of some sort. Point #1 implies that any such creation must be based on mathematics, and point #2 implies that, if evolution of life is the "goal", that mathematics may be essentially unique.

Putting it all together suggests that our universe is a "singular, almost-entirely mathematical" creation which exists for the purpose of evolving life. It satisfies the unique mathematical laws which enable this outcome, so in this sense one could say there was "no choice" in its creation.

Of course this begs the question of what entity "created" the universe in the first place. I don't attempt to resolve this problem but am only concerned with the universe that *we* experience, not a larger "meta-universe" in which it may be contained. If one dislikes the overall hypothesis, the points 1,2, and 3 are still separately worthy of consideration.