Since he is a religious zealot then I bet he welcomes such people to write to him.
But personally I don't waste my time on people promoting mysticism.

The living human body is a product of physics. The phenomena of physics is the reason the human body is the way it is. — SonJnana

As I said, I don't understand your usage of terminology. "Physics" refers to a field of study. You claim that you use it to refer to the phenomena studied by that field. The human body is not studied by the field of physics, so your use of terminology is inconsistent to the extent of being very confusing.

How could a formula/direction for the universe have existed prior to the universe? You have to assume that there was a time prior to the universe. That has to be demonstrated. How can spacetime exist before spacetime exists? — SonJnana

You're going backwards. My demonstration indicates that direction must be prior to the physical activities which constitute the living body. therefore direction is prior to the existence of the body. If you want to extrapolate this, and assume that the activities within the physical universe are directed in a way similar to the activities of a living body, then we could come to the same conclusion concerning the physical universe.

But those are assumptions. And it doesn't appear to be appropriate to assume that the activities of the universe are directed in the same way as the activities of a living body, so this might not be a sound assumption. That there is formula/direction prior to the existence of the universe would be a conclusion drawn from that assumption, if you were to accept it. Whatever preconceived notions you may have concerning the universe, and spacetime, are irrelevant to the demonstration, but I think you would find that they would prevent you from making that assumption.

As I said, I don't understand your usage of terminology. "Physics" refers to a field of study. You claim that you use it to refer to the phenomena studied by that field. The human body is not studied by the field of physics, so your use of terminology is inconsistent to the extent of being very confusing. — Metaphysician Undercover

I told you already multiple times the phenomena we study in biology is the way it is because of the phenomena of biochemistry, which is the way it is because of the phenomena of chemistry. Chemistry is the way it is because the phenomena of physics. Therefore the phenomena of biology is the way it is because of the way the phenomena of physics is.

You're going backwards. My demonstration indicates that direction must be prior to the physical activities which constitute the living body. therefore direction is prior to the existence of the body. — Metaphysician Undercover

This "direction" of the living body you speak of is a direct product of chemistry and physics. Biomolecules work the way they do because of the properties of atoms. Atoms are the way they are because of physics. Does an apple need some sort of metaphysical "direction" before it falls? It falls because of the way physics works. So the only metaphysical "direction" you could try to argue that is necessary would be the direction of physics itself.

That there is formula/direction prior to the existence of the universe would be a conclusion drawn from that assumption, if you were to accept it. Whatever preconceived notions you may have concerning the universe, and spacetime, are irrelevant to the demonstration, but I think you would find that they would prevent you from making that assumption. — Metaphysician Undercover

The problem is that one can't say a formula for the universe existed prior to the universe because that statement itself assumes time before the universe. Therefore the assumption itself is flawed and the conclusion can't be made, just as I think you've mentioned here.