But it seems to me that Intelligent Design requires that there be such an algorithm, or something closely akin to it. The "Father of Science," Aristotle, called it the Unmoved Mover or First Cause. Given that the first cause spreads its effects throughout the entire causal chain throughout time, and its effects are characterized by it "from inception," all things are as they are (and not some other way) because of the "content" of the first cause.
Aristotle said there had to be a First Cause, because an infinite regression, in effect, can provide no "limit," without which no definite thing can come into existence. Though you might have some kind of an inchoate, eternal "cosmic soup," the absence of the limit means the soup has no principle whereby it can manifest actual living forms.
I absolutely agree with you - however, the evolutionists will define inception right off the table because the theory of evolution excludes it.
But that really has nothing to do with testing for intelligent design by looking for algorithm at inception. They are two separate issues, but so few understand. Sigh...
This doesn't explain anything. One of the major concerns most creationists have with the theory of evolution is that it involves undirected mutations. How does the First Cause change that? Extreme determinism?