Wait, Abraham actually existed? I highly doubt this. Do you have sources?

Anyway, how much of this is supposed to be literal? I highly doubt that the first AI will be much like me, so there is not reason to believe that this establishes any sort of upper bound on capability. It establishes a lower bound, but it gives no indication of how likely that lower bound is, especially because it gets its numbers from speculation about the capabilities of memristors.

It is good as an intuition pump. If this is the purpose, I suggest you take out some of the specifics of technology. This sets off conjunction fallacy detectors in my brain. You can try combating this with some disjunctions and antipredictions, such as showing other ways that technology might develop to show that this future is typical, despite the specifics of technology. Everything after the discussion of technology holds, given the premises and there is nothing there too dependent on the specifics for this to be useful.