"So there are similarities between the mathematical models governing these two systems" (namely the brain and the universe)
Both the brain and the universe are physical structures, so there is nothing particularly improbable in the idea that they should share some similarities.
"would it be possible ascertain some sort of intentionality, purpose or meaning"
Why are you asking? It is obviously always possible (to) ascertain anything and this without any evidence at all. We see many people doing this all the time.
Take two strings of alphabetical characters. Suppose the first string is the original text of Descartes's Discourse on the Method, certainly one of the most meaningful philosophical texts ever written, and the second one a string with exact same number of characters, but whose characters are randomly determined.
We could compare the two strings, character for character. We would find that many characters occur at the same positions in both strings. We would also find identical substrings occurring at the same location or at different locations.
Given this, would it be possible to ascertain some sort of intentionality, purpose or meaning? No. All we need is to understand probabilities.
Same thing for the structure of the brain versus the structure of the universe. Similarities might be significant in terms of their respective structures and in terms of how these structures evolved, but any notion of intentionality, purpose or meaning can only be self-delusion or wishful thinking.
No one dedicated to following the scientific method would assert anything from mere similarities, however striking they may be. Scientists don't assert. They observe the universe, conceive of possible theories explaining what they have observed, and they keep observing the universe to try and find new facts that would falsify the theory.
This process requires that the theory in question should be possibly falsified. It is very easy for example to imagine the sort of facts that would falsify the Theory of General Relativity. By contrast, it is completely unclear how you could possibly falsify a notion of intentionality, purpose or meaning.
This is no science. No one follows the scientific method who indulges in asserting intentionality, purpose or meaning from mere similarities.