Well we're all going to find zilch in physics and cosmology
If there is zilch in physics and zilch above physics, then there's zilch gods, and as pointed out.
No I meant the physics (theoretical) is not
apt enough to tell you really anything, whether such things is possible or not. I'm with steve_b here.
But the nature of metaphysical contradiction being nonsense and non-existent absolutely tells us a number of proven things:
There are zero or more gods. There may be (read: are
almost certainly) zero gods.
Of 'or more', only those whose metaphysical description offers no contradictions in the syntax of their definition may 'exist'.
No creator god may metaphysically exist in such a way that this universe, as a creation, is not also exactly 'a simulation' (as per Occam's Razor and the observability of unthinking regular mechanics and invariant, if 'random' quantum mechanics).
This means, necessarily, that
if there is a god either there is infinite simulation regress and there is no difference between "universe" and "simulation" or that it is entirely possible for a universe to exist all on its own... Including this one however absurd it's initial conditions are (or are not). Hence Occam's razor educates against belief in the first place.
There is, in the religious acceptance of a single god who has created a simulation, an admission that the uncertainty they use to proclaim this invites the infinite regress and the "no difference" principle between the concept of "universe" and "simulation".
By the no difference principle it would mean I myself fit the definition you use for 'god', and the thing I created is, in fact, a universe.
At which point we make uncomfortable observations: I am not ethically perfect. In fact the majority of folks who are playing this game routinely smite their creations merely for being unhappy, and smash inconvenient children under drawbridges.
I would say, in fact, that our behavior as gods is entirely in keeping with the descriptions of Biblegod's monstrous and ethically bereft conduct.
But even so, why should my own creations worship me? I do not want them to. It does nothing for them, and nothing for me. It makes their world no better, and it makes my interactions with them in their world no better.
I pointedly would very much dislike if the dev who designed the simulation, tomorrow, released a patch which suddenly made everyone aware that I was their god. It would be enough for me to shitcan the whole thing.
Their happiness in fact depends on them not knowing I even exist. And yes, they have something that amounts to happiness.
That should be a hint for you, then, too, about your religion and the implications these observed facts about an observed god of an observed simulated universe hold for your own proposed god of
this universe as proposed by your belief which would necessarily require this to be a simulation.
Namely, everything about your religion is wrong: you ought not worship creators, you ought not receive directions in ethics from them as absolute truth, you ought not trust them implicitly, they likely do not want your worship, they can very well NOT be what you talk to when you pray, they can very well prefer people to be atheists, and they absolutely do not need, necessarily, to exist at all.
So
even if you bring me and show me an invisible pink unicorn, I'm still not going to trust it, and I won't even accept that it has an existence of any kind except the imaginary kind until you do.
