I have always enjoyed this subject, but there is one big flaw in the idea that we are living in a simulation. If we are, then who is running that simulation? And if you can generate such an accurate simulation, what is to say that our simulation runners, aren't a simulation themselves? You start down this infinite regression where you never know who is running any simulations. It is therefore more likely that we are in the base reality rather than not. Also, as you go up the chain, you start to run in to computational issues. Even if you have incredible computers, at some point, they will not be able to keep up. You should see gaps or glitches, and since all of our experiments have been very predictable , it is likely we are in base reality.
Good read though. Thank you.
I agree with you point theoretically, and I too struggle with the question of who or what maintains the simulation. I don't, however, view this as a reasonable criticism of the theory in itself. Just because we cannot fathom the origins of the simulated reality doesn't change the statistical argument that this is, in fact, a simulation.
On the other hand, it's so far removed that our notion of computing power might not even apply to the real base reality. Our notion of physics might not even apply.
Very true and good points. Sure I might be a brain in a vat, or a simulation, but I still believe my experience and will continue to live my life as if we are in the base reality.
Actually there is a reddit for such glitches!
https://www.reddit.com/r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix/