In fact, in physics there is a reliance on some kind of design in the universe, intelligent design is not necessary, but if the fundamental laws of physics were evolving or changing it would be difficult to do physics.
---
Yeah no kidding, that's what always amazed me! For example F=ma works everywhere, everytime! Plus it's so mathematically simple! Just multiplication, one step up from addition! Why is that? No matrices, no integrals, nothing.
And then why does it seem, the further out in scale you go, either up or down, the math gets that much nastier? Schroedingers equation you need partial derivatives to solve. You can't get closed form solutions to any of them?
I don't know if you have any answers but given you have a degree in Physics and made such great observations above, maybe you have some ideas.
Really? Than why can't it compute the outer orbits of galaxies?
Actually, it doesn't. It is only true in the nonrelativistic limit.
And then why does it seem, the further out in scale you go, either up or down, the math gets that much nastier? Schroedingers equation you need partial derivatives to solve. You can't get closed form solutions to any of them?
Sure you can. Closed form solutions are standard for the hydrogen atom. They become more difficult only for the multi-body problem. You can derive closed form solutions for the Schoedinger equation all the way through the hyperfine structure.
When you get into classical mechanics you find that F = ma applies, but the implementation gets into all the math you have. What if you have a system of particles where the coordinate system does not have a uniform force across it but a lumpy potential field. For example, the Milky Way. The astronomy sector of physics is still having trouble modeling that system. Then somebody suggests they have to invoke general relativity. Or, suppose the potential field is electric. Force does not lie along the line between two electric charges if they are moving, but generates magnetic components in some other direction.