[ExI] simulation stat goofiness

[Will Steinberg]

I have always thought there were a few issues with the simulation argument.

One that I keep coming back to is the reality of the simulator's world
itself.

Let's say that K_0 is equal to the number of worlds that are simulated with
fidelity in the neighborhood of the fidelity of ours.  This means that,
comparing all the simulated worlds with the original world, there is a
1/K_0 chance that we are in the original world.  And we reject the null
hypothesis that we are in a real world, as long as 1/K_0 is less than some
chosen probability which we can call p_real.

However, can't you make a similar argument for the world of the simulator?
How many worlds are there with a fidelity close to theirs?  Well, I would
say that, since it requires more processing power, the amount of worlds
like that is less than K_0, call it K_1.  So comparing all the worlds like
that to the world of their potential simulator, there is a 1/K_1 chance
they are real.  This is still likely less than p_real.

But if you keep applying this argument, eventually we reach a world which
has so many levels of simulation in its simulations, that it's rare enough
that their world is likely to be real.

The next question is, what the hell is that world like?  Does that world
simply have access to more processing power?  Why?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200918/421f0c10/attachment.htm>