I got your idea, but still not convinced. I think that there will be more civilizations in panspermia-universes, because panspermia helps to evade other types of early filters:
If there is only one planet with life in a Galaxy, it may have only 1 in 1000 chance to survive other risks like asteroid impacts, and if it doesn’t survive, this galaxy is done.
In the panspermia-galaxy, there are 10 billion planets with life, and at least some of them will survive all other early filters. Thus panspermia-galaxy will almost certainly create an intelligence explosion wave.
So, for 1000 singularities in the panspemia galaxies there will be only one in non-panspermia-galaxy with life. So if I am in a simulation of whatever type, it is 1000 times more probable that it is created by a singularity in a panspermia-galaxy.
However, inside a simulation could be simulated a world with different laws of panspermia than in real world of simulators. To object this, I suggest general principle: “Most facts about outside world in the most simulations are true”. I will prove it based on the contrary evidence: Imagine that in all simulations created by all possible civilizations there is a lie A, while in the real world non-A is true. ( e.g. 2=2=5 or Sun’s size is square). In that case, there should be a coordination process which is applicable to all possible civilizations which create simulations. However, there is no such physical process. So all simulations can’t share one lie. (There is one exception: all simulations lie that they are real world).
Thus, any random fact A about the outside world in a simulation is unlikely to be false (but could be). The fact that we are in panspermia galaxy or not is a random fact and all simulators can’t coordinate to lie in one way about it. Thus we should give high credence to the idea that our simulation represents the real state of affairs regarding the probability of panspermia in our galaxy. Thus, being in a simulation or not doesn’t affect significantly our estimations about the type of the galaxy where we originated.
I got your idea, but still not convinced. I think that there will be more civilizations in panspermia-universes, because panspermia helps to evade other types of early filters:
If there is only one planet with life in a Galaxy, it may have only 1 in 1000 chance to survive other risks like asteroid impacts, and if it doesn’t survive, this galaxy is done.
In the panspermia-galaxy, there are 10 billion planets with life, and at least some of them will survive all other early filters. Thus panspermia-galaxy will almost certainly create an intelligence explosion wave.
So, for 1000 singularities in the panspemia galaxies there will be only one in non-panspermia-galaxy with life. So if I am in a simulation of whatever type, it is 1000 times more probable that it is created by a singularity in a panspermia-galaxy.
However, inside a simulation could be simulated a world with different laws of panspermia than in real world of simulators. To object this, I suggest general principle: “Most facts about outside world in the most simulations are true”. I will prove it based on the contrary evidence: Imagine that in all simulations created by all possible civilizations there is a lie A, while in the real world non-A is true. ( e.g. 2=2=5 or Sun’s size is square). In that case, there should be a coordination process which is applicable to all possible civilizations which create simulations. However, there is no such physical process. So all simulations can’t share one lie. (There is one exception: all simulations lie that they are real world).
Thus, any random fact A about the outside world in a simulation is unlikely to be false (but could be). The fact that we are in panspermia galaxy or not is a random fact and all simulators can’t coordinate to lie in one way about it. Thus we should give high credence to the idea that our simulation represents the real state of affairs regarding the probability of panspermia in our galaxy. Thus, being in a simulation or not doesn’t affect significantly our estimations about the type of the galaxy where we originated.
Ahhh, OK now I think I agree with you. Thanks.
Not sure about the proof by contrary, I’ll need to think about it more.