Both physics and the unreasonable success of math at explaining the world make much more sense if you just assume we are living in a math equation.
Do you think you're living in the matrix? Or do you just think that quantum mechanics can be fully simulated on a classical turing machine?
Here is the almighty Scott Aaronson to set us right on the subject:
http://www.closertotruth.com/series/the-cosmos-computer#vide...
http://www.closertotruth.com/series/what-does-quantum-theory...
EDIT: lets throw in this full length lecture at IBM for good measure, even though its not 100% related https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7lv4-Bah5c
That all physical systems are governed by equations rather than, say, gnomes pulling levers.
>Or do you just think that quantum mechanics can be fully simulated on a classical turing machine?
This seems quite reasonable. There's no good reason this couldn't be the case, and quantization of fundamental units like Energy-time/Momentum-distance is certainly something that a programmer might reasonably do for a simulation.
If your glass is half full, then of course we are living in a simulation. What is the halting problem for this simulation? That's the real question. IMO that should be true AI.
Not entirely different from the idea of being able to convert from magnetic to electric field and vice versa via a collection of moving bits and bobs as discovered a century or two ago.
It could be useful, in some peculiar way. Or maybe not.
Or blockchains.
> as discovered a century or two ago
Give it up to Michael Faraday!
If the effectiveness of math is unreasonable, then the universe is either not logical, unreasonably simple in its logic or math is an unreasonably bad language to investigate facts in.
But of course, the question of why the universe has this particular complexity (it's possible to conceive of life with either simpler or more complex universes) may not be a questions that's "answerable" at all -- there must be some ultimate system in which things to happen (almost by definition), and it must be ultimately arbitrary.
I doubt we'll ever get the answer to the first one in this life/physical realm. Philosophy can help ponder over the second one though.
From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: 'why not?'
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nothingness/#WhyTheSomRatT...
If I remember correctly, one of his answers was something like "Because it's the only Universe where we could ask such a question". I think what he means is that all the other possible universes (or most of them) might or might not exist somewhere else, but they certainly don't include intelligent life with the ability to ask "Why is there something instead of nothing?". When you ask that question you are assuming this is the only universe and it was "meant to be". But our sole existence is not evidence at all for a "destination".
"What do I do now" is a complete different question, and I guess people might find their own personal answers in the most varied places. You obviously don't need a physicist for that, although lots of them also think about these things.
The basic response to this question is "What should you do?"
Western civilization is founded on a particular justification for answering this question.
I don't think that it is unreasonable. Math is the study of formal systems. A formal system can describe pretty much anything. Much study has been concentrated on formal systems that describe some aspect of our universe, as these are the ones that tend to be "useful". However, there are an infinite number of formal systems out there which don't describe any aspect of our physical universe. The math "exists" irregardless of any physical interpretation. It is we as conscious beings that attribute "meaning" to mathematical systems that happen to describe some aspects of our daily life.
Humorously, for all we know we're surrounded by entities which can perceive a lot. But we're as aware of them as slugs are of us when confronted by our shoes...
One thing about our math sense is that it seems fairly underdeveloped in comparison to some other abilities; maybe physics is currently dominated by math because we have to work harder at it. Otherwise, the fruits would've come to us earlier.