Ya might want to crack open a copy of Plato some time. You know, the guy whence came the concept of platonic solids. He knew a bit about mathematics and the perceived divine perfection of creation.
Aquinas would also be a good read if you want questions about absolute and logical proof of the divine.
In fact, if you're going to wax philosophical, you would do well to read what other people have had to say over the last 7000 years or so. If nothing else, it would help you sleep and provide plenty of topics for cocktail-party conversations. Maybe even open your mind to completely new ideas.
Thomas Aquinas isn't interesting. He is boring. He didn't ever prove anything. Assuming we accept the need for a first mover, which is an assumption and not a fact in evidence, it has nothing to do with the Abrahamic god, another assumption of facts not in evidence by Aquinas.
Any undergrad psych major can make arguments better than Aquinas did.