Does the Rabbi support the proof?

Was this written seriously? I thought you were joking.
What proof do you see here? Clearly the electron is not making a teleological calculation. This is our description of what happens to it. Just as an object with mass, which according to Aristotle “strives” to return to its place of origin (the ground), does not really strive and make judgments. It is only a manner of speaking meant to describe what actually happens. Aristotle’s teleological physics does not mean to attribute consciousness, desires, aspirations, or thought to a stone.
According to Fermat’s principle, a ray of light moves along the path that takes the least time. That is, it “chooses” an optimal path from among all possible paths. Does that also prove the existence of God? By the way, here I do see a not-unreasonable consideration, because purposiveness indicates someone who created the mechanism that moves toward its purpose. I think I wrote about this in the third notebook.

In this article (from Haaretz—I’ll try to copy it here tomorrow) there is a similar claim about consciousness being “proven” from quantum mechanics, toward the end. https://www.haaretz.co.il/magazine/.premium-MAGAZINE-1.7135229?utm_source=App_Share&utm_medium=Android_Native&utm_campaign=Share Persico wrote about this article in another piece in which he presents an argument and new claims about the reality of God and His goodness. https://tomerpersico.com/2019/04/24/the-good/

George Berkeley made such an argument to prove the existence of the Creator this way.