The simulation hypothesis supposes that the number of simulations would be astronomically high because of recursive simulations in simulations.
I don’t think this is essential for the argument. For example, we could run a sim where constructing computers is impossible. And according to Bostrom: “the simulation argument does not purport to show (and I do not believe) that the Sims outnumber the [non‐Sim] humans.”
Note that there is also overhead with every layer of simulation.
This presumes that we have to fully simulate the whole universe in detail, without room for approximations, and that the physical laws of the outer universe are the same as ours.
“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 the outer universe are the same as ours.
I agree with this, these approximations are related to the granularity I was describing. My belief is that there are only so many approximations you can make before the simulated universe is not detailed enough to express individual consciousness.
I am fully open to the possibility that a civilisation in a reality with more complicated physics is simulating ours, but I see no reason to believe this is probable, or more probable than many other possible claims (eg. brain in a vat).
I don’t think this is essential for the argument. For example, we could run a sim where constructing computers is impossible. And according to Bostrom: “the simulation argument does not purport to show (and I do not believe) that the Sims outnumber the [non‐Sim] humans.”
This presumes that we have to fully simulate the whole universe in detail, without room for approximations, and that the physical laws of the outer universe are the same as ours.
Thanks for the response Lech
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.
I agree with this, these approximations are related to the granularity I was describing. My belief is that there are only so many approximations you can make before the simulated universe is not detailed enough to express individual consciousness.
I am fully open to the possibility that a civilisation in a reality with more complicated physics is simulating ours, but I see no reason to believe this is probable, or more probable than many other possible claims (eg. brain in a vat).