[extropy-chat] The Simulation Argument (was: Atheistslaunchinquisition...)

[Brian Lee]

There would not be an infinite number of sims, just a hugely finite number. 
So if the original sim has massive horsepower it could support all the 
billions, etc of subsims.

If I was writing a universe sim, I would actually want my sim to develop 
subsims and so on as that would be much more amusing to observe and would 
increase the chance of finding some previously unknown insight into my 
current universe.

Of course we could get to a point where all the sims crash, but I'm assuming 
that the original sim maker is smart enough to add more processing power as 
is necessary.

BAL

>From: "Kevin Freels" <cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net>
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Simulation Argument (was: 
>Atheistslaunchinquisition...)
>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 13:33:03 -0600
>
>Eugen said: "Jeez. People, this isn't philosophy. Technology has
>constraints, and in
>evolutionary scenarios, costs. This Pearly Gates here are *expensive*."
>
>That was my point. Which is why I think that the simulation argument is
>wrong.
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat