Ah! Thanks for the elucidation. I completely agree about maths.
However, I now understand that you may have missed my central point about why God follows the laws of physics. Given my thesis that no good person (or God) creates laws that don't apply to them, but only others, I contend that God only made physics He would certainly follow, not that somehow constrained Him.
I'm not trying to make an argument that God could, or did, make a rock so heavy He couldn't lift it, but that He would follow the rules He made, because He's not a slimeball overlord/politician, but plays fair.
You are limiting God by attributing human moral sentiment unto Him. Why must God "play fair" by creating laws that binds Himself for the sake of some moral sentiment in his creatures? If God is bound and limited in action by sentiments of his creatures, then He is a slave of His creation and not its master. Do men worship slaves? Are slaves worthy of worship?
From theistic perspective, God is the first and final principle of morality and physical "laws" that constrain mortals. Attributing mortal sentiment unto an infinite being would be erroneous. Do we as men concern ourselves with the pathetic mewling of ants' sentiments and tendencies? Fairness is a human construct that does not exist in natural creation or human reality. That men attribute "fairness" to their creator to limit His actions is hubris itself. Justice is not fairness, and master need not follow the rules for slaves, in order to be just.
There is always so much depth in your comments =)
The first I will address is your continued miscategorization of choosing to act in a given way as some kind of bondage. Being able to act as we choose to is rather freedom.
I posit a God that has freely chosen not only to act as He will, but to potentiate all to do so. In view of the demonstrable contraindicated actions of many, we see that we are not held in some kind of bondage philosophically, but indeed may act within the constraints of physics at our sole option.
I refute your contention that God is His own slave, as silly.
While attributing to anyone my personal morals is indeed erroneous, it is factual that everyone has morals. The particulars of their 'brand' of morals are variable, yet we see that physics is not variable, and my using the physical laws extant to derive the morals of a creator God does not seem unreasonable to me, albeit certain to result in imperfect understanding insofar as my understanding of physics is imperfect, amongst other reasons.
As to ants and men, I commend to you the work of E.O. Wilson, one of the most brilliant biologists that has ever published, and who spent most of his life studying ants.
Fairness is not a human construct at all. Dogs, octopi, even savage cats consider fairness, and to a far greater degree than is strictly profitable in terms of sustenance. Do research the topic, and profit yourself by revealing the limitations mere economic considerations proscribe.
Justice... Ah! that discussion is beyond me presently. I appreciate your stimulations to give it more thought.
Thanks!