nocturne

Thanks for the response Lech

"the simulation argument does not purport to show (and I do not believe) that the Sims outnumber the [non‐Sim] humans."

I was not aware of this as a common caveat to the simulation hypothesis. If it is, I still do not see a reason to believe that it is probable that conscious beings with our set of experiences should expect to exist in a simulation. It makes more sense to assume that this is the base reality if we expect those minds to be in the majority.

This presumes that we have to fully simulate the whole universe in detail, without room for approximations, and that the physical laws of

Here is my best argument against the simulation hypothesis:

Simulations typically have a reduction in dimensionality, at least the ones we have made so far. Which is to say: you cannot simulate the whole of the universe within itself. Our simulations are more granular and smaller than the real world, even if they become remarkably close. This reduction in detail can be temporal or spatial.

The simulation hypothesis supposes that the number of simulations would be astronomically high because of recursive simulations in simulations. This is the part that I take issue with. Assume that we live in simulation level X (some point in the chain of simulations). Anything that happens in the simulation... (read more)