There are substructures of space and of particles. (Proof: black holes have finite entropy.) They allow to calculate the physical constants uniquely (see www.motionmountain.net/research.html).
There is no fine tuning in nature. Fine tuning is not physics, it is science fiction.
There is no multiverse. That is science fiction.
There are simple arguments showing that the known laws are the only possible ones (ses www.motionmountain.net/9lines.html).
The entropy and initial conditions arguments about the universe are physically wrong, sorry.
Whoever needs or wants physics to prove the existence God, is on the wrong track.
Rabbi Feder, thank you for your answers. As a physicist, I cherish the usual view that a statement is correct if it agrees with observations. That is why we disagree on physics matters. And of course you can read my peer-reviewed papers linked above. However, in physics, truth is not related to peer-review, not to what Penrose or Hawking may have said or meant, not what the Nobel-committe said or might say, but to correspondence with observations. In nature, no observation confirms the existence of the multiverse, of singularities, of fine-tuning, of specifically chosen initial conditions, or of the freedom to chose physical laws. But of course, you are free to believe all of this nevertheless.
I wish you all the best for your personal quest.
It's possible that you are a genius who has solved all of physics in just 9 lines. I don't know you and I'm really not competent to judge whether you or top physicists, like Roger Penrose, are correct about the physics.
Our entire method on the Physics to God podcast is not to argue the science with great scientists but rather to accept the scientific consensus about Penrose's well know and accepted arguments about black holes and entropy. He did happen to recently win a Nobel Prize on his work with black hole singularities with Stephen Hawking.