Over two centuries ago, Napoleon said to the mathematician Laplace:
"M. Laplace, you have written this large book on the system of the universe, and have never even mentioned its Creator."
Laplace replied "Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là." ("I had no need of that hypothesis.")
This is interesting, because Laplace had no notion of any of the modern theories and yet he still imagined he could explain the universe without God. In other words, all this has nothing to do with the findings and speculations of recent physics, and everything to do with male hubris, which in the Rajasic era grew to monstrous proportions.
As you say:
He claims that the Universe can - and will - create itself out of nothing as long as the laws of physics such as gravity apply. He says "Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist." As long as the laws of physics such as gravity apply
. So how did these laws come out of nothing? And how do we know that they are the same in all times and all places? We don't.
What is actually being said is:
"supply me with a system so complex that it has taken ten generations of mathematicians centuries to understand it (or to imagine they do) and I will tell you how something can come out of nothing.
Well - out of nothing except that unbelievably complex system - but that is nearly
nothing, isn't it?"
Are we supposed to applaud or laugh?