Does this argument hold up? If not, why?

Assuming we’re the first and real universe..

If [we] created a simulation of the universe and someone on earth and someone on the moon observed it, they wouldn’t experience the same “reality” due to the speed of light causing latency between their experiences. Therefore, a simulated universe is a localized experience for the parent universe.

Therefore, the simulated universe must contain less information than the parent universe.

Therefore, there is a limit to the number of simulated universes that can exist because each must contain less information than its parent.

Therefore, the odds of our universe being a simulation are much lower than proposed by the simulation hypothesis, which implies each simulation is capable of creating an informationally equivalent simulation in a recursive fashion, ad infinitum.

  • $\begingroup$ With apologies to Stephen Hawking and others, it's simulations all the way down. $\endgroup$
    – hdhondt
    Commented Aug 5, 2022 at 6:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Simulation idea is biggest scam on Earth. I've analyzed similar proof due to the "divide and conquer" algorithm nature, slightly from computer science perspective, but it must overlap with Physics too, because where is information,- there's entropy, states, thermodynamics and such. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 5, 2022 at 6:46


Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.