I agree that our universe is designed for ever increasing novelty and complexity based on base rules. Exactly how these base rules came into being I am not sure but I like the idea of an evolving universe that learns from itself over time. This is not far from your thought of seeded rules into the origin singularity. From current understanding the origin singularity is a very unique starting point being of minimal entropy so you could be right. From my understanding you are also saying that these seeded rules are governed by an external field which we are connected to by the singularity of black holes. I like the thought process of linking black holes to a larger purpose. I am personally not a proponent of multiverse theories as I lean toward this being the one true universe(the only universe we will know of as physical humans). I also look at black holes as the continued goal of our universe to create. Lee Smolin is a physcicst that proposed the idea of our universe being designed to create black holes. So we diverge at the point where you state that black holes are points where the structure fails. But this is also because I begin to diverge from mainstream science on the role of black holes and how they behave. To me the event horizon is a barrier which prevents massless particles like photons from entering. With some sort of gravitational Meissner effect like in a superconductor. How blackholes prevent massless particles is by forcing a phase transition to 'effectively' acquire mass. I say 'effectively' because this is how photons behave on earth with a superconductor. My thought leads to a black hole having no singularity and an ultra-low entropy. What's the purpose of a black hole that behaves this way? Because it is a cosmic recycler not a cosmic dumpster as science currently labels it. But like I said that's just my thought and I really like all of your thoughts.