Physics making me believe god might exist

I feel that way too. Its much more likely some higher power created the universe. It seems naive to me that people thing its more likely that tje universe designed itself. If you look at a human body or a mammals body, just for an example, its body is built like an engine. The heart pumps the blood, the lungs provide the oxygen, the brain controls it, the veins supply the blood it just seems unlikely to me that just happened on its own from millions of years. Thats a very intelligent design. I dont believe a bunch of mindless atoms and cells just happen to come up with that design on their own.

I say that as someone that is not religious. I dont believe much of the bible. But I do think it's likely there was some type of intelligent force that created us. Whether its something like us, or something we can not understand.

"beings as powerful as "god" could exist just not the way we expect them to be"

Aliens basically.

There are lots of cool things out there and we don't understand all of it, therefore God exists? That seems like a bit of a leap to me. I don't think that's a very good argument at all.

It's impossible for god to exist. But it's impossible that the universe exists w/o a god who made it. Stay curious and stay humble as you learn and reevaluate what you learn. (Me? I dunno)

I'll make it easy for you. God doesn't exist.

In science circles physicists are open to the existence of God. It is socials scientists that are atheists.

I've had similar thoughts on magic mushrooms. I dug deep into my mind and came up with the most basic truth I could imagine and it was basically what jesus said about how you should love everyone as yourself as we are all one.

Perfectly normal. If you think about it, we know virtually nothing about the world. I think over 80% of our ocean is unmapped, unobserved, and uncovered. We also don't have cures to many diseases as we often rely on the next best thing: treatments.
We know nothing about life, death, the universe, why we dream, etc. Science itself backs up this claim as we say there isn't proof, but evidence. Proof can only exist when there is no doubt and there is always doubt.
We could be in a whole simulation if you think about it. There is no proof that we are not in a simulation such as there is no proof that God did not create the universe. What if evidence of evolution is God's doing and we just haven't figured it out because God gave us free will to figure it out ourselves?
As you said, everything is so intricate that it wouldn't make sense that rocks, atoms, and cells did all the work. I think it's interesting that we just give them all the credit. Humans design things with a purpose (homes, clothes, roads, etc), I also think we were designed bigger than the purpose to live.
It's clear that we are using the science of deduction to explain everything, but most of the time there are exceptions to rules, hence why we know nothing.
All science is my opinion is the study of patterns in (our bodies, nature, matter, etc). I find it hard to believe that we are intelligent beings with no purpose. In science, we often say that everything has or had a purpose and it wouldn't make sense to waste energy. Why not extend that belief to human beings? What's our purpose? Our meaning in life? Don't know? Welcome to one of the gazillion things we don't know. Many, including myself, believe in a higher being because we feel or observe something science itself can't explain. You can't just give all the credit to science itself unless you acknowledge that there is a higher being that is bigger than science and therefore responsible for that science.

I don't know what you're on but it is some good shit for sure.

If there one day appears to be a foolproof theory which has been tested and stacks up against similar studies that also come to the conclusion that God is real, I will join the "believer" club, and not a second before.

None of this "maybe he exists in this form or that form" shit. If you want to support creationist theory with your own evidence, then fine, but it must be concrete enough to hold water.

I mean I'm an atheist but this is still normal I feel like.

"Yes; but you must wager. It is not optional. You are embarked. Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose. This is one point settled. But your happiness? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. "That is very fine. Yes, I must wager; but I may perhaps wager too much." Let us see. Since there is an equal risk of gain and of loss, if you had only to gain two lives, instead of one, you might still wager. But if there were three lives to gain, you would have to play (since you are under the necessity of playing), and you would be imprudent, when you are forced to play, not to chance your life to gain three at a game where there is an equal risk of loss and gain. But there is an eternity of life and happiness. And this being so, if there were an infinity of chances, of which one only would be for you, you would still be right in wagering one to win two, and you would act stupidly, being obliged to play, by refusing to stake one life against three at a game in which out of an infinity of chances there is one for you, if there were an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain. But there is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. It is all divided; where-ever the infinite is and there is not an infinity of chances of loss against that of gain, there is no time to hesitate, you must give all. And thus, when one is forced to play, he must renounce reason to preserve his life, rather than risk it for infinite gain, as likely to happen as the loss of nothingness." - Blaise Pascal

So when you can't explain or understand things anymore, it has to be god?
Your naivety is interesting.

Perfectly normal, many atheists and antitheists are encouraged to believe in anything to do with God and end up believing in it if they had any counter-evidence that their irreligion is the only truth, e.g. it proves that religion in all its obscurities can suck you into believing a truth of the ultimate reality as long as it doesn't make you a slave and makes you without a boss ruling your life, then yes this is normal, and yes it's normal for such confirmation bias to be the reason for an atheist's conversion from non-belief to belief.

You just described Islam. Knowing there’s a higher power but knowing there’s no way we could ever comprehend its magnitude or what it really is. Science and religion going hand in hand.

Never in the history of mankind had the answer been “magic” or “god.” God is what we default to things we don’t understand. The more I have learned if science, the more clear it is god is a myth. And even if their is a creator, they certainly aren’t the one worshipped by any religion.

Man just the fibonacci sequence and the golden ratio prove a higher power/ intelligent creator exists. Nothing that perfect happens by accident

1. Hitchen's Razor:

What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

You don't need to & can't prove that God exists, so before you find any actual evidence that proves the existence of God, you can assume that he doesn't exist.

2. Alder's razor/Newton's Flaming Laser Sword

If something cannot be settled by experiment or observation then it is not worthy of debate.

Apparently, you can't use an experiment to prove God's existence, so this problem IS NOT WORTH DEBATING.

He dose my boy