The author doesn’t indicate that Emeagwali has helped solve a “wide array of real-world problems that supercomputers cannot solve.” Rather, the passage discusses Emeagwali’s successful modeling of oil field flow. It also discusses Emeagwali’s predictions for future problems that can be solved. But we don’t get evidence Emeagwali has helped solve a “wide array” of problems.

This doesn’t capture the passage’s focus on Emeagwali’s design of a parallel computing system. The main point isn’t about how Emeagwali shows us a broader point about paradigms and solutions. The main point is about Emeagwali and his achievements.

The passage never suggests that Emeagwali discovered the basic math principles underlying natural systems. His designs are based off of natural systems, but this doesn’t imply that he discovered basic math principles.

The main point is about Emeagwali’s achievements, not on what other scientists are more likely to do in the future. Although the passage does note that Emeagwali believes that scientists will increasingly look to nature for solutions to technological problems, Emeagwali’s belief isn’t the overall point of the passage.