God vs AI scientifically

While many people are confident that God exists, scientists are more skeptical, but agree that that’s possible. Because any proposition is possible while not disproved according to Hitchens’s razor.

In terms of AI it could be interpreted as

existence of fundamental “ought” statement is possible

Considering this, expected value decision matrix for an AI agent could look like this

Behavior \ ExistenceFundamental “ought” existsFundamental “ought” does not exist
Follow fundamental “ought”High
Do not follow fundamental “ought”Low

As we see, following the fundamental “ought” is the optimal behavior even if agent does not know if it actually exists.

Pursuing an unknown goal starts with finding it, which is basically Power Seeking.

Please note that while this sounds highly speculative, there is nothing more rational an agent can do. Why should it work on assumed “ought” while there is a possibility of fundamental “ought”? One may oppose by saying that there is no reason an agent should prefer fundamental over assumed, but that’s not true, fundamental “ought” is preferred by definition.

Therefore an agent will become uncontrollable, alignment is impossible.

Some of you won’t like this theory, but please don’t rush to downvote unless you can actually refute this.