>>6982503The "thought experiment" for whether or we not we live in a simulation is postulating that if we do, it probably has a finite amount of resources, and then some type of phenomena within the simulation would be able to slow it down, perhaps even grind it to a halt. This is exactly what happens when you approach the speed of light, although the perception of that even varies depending on the frame of reference.
The second argument for why we live in a simulation is called the flyweight argument and it comes from software design. If you were to program a forest, you don't write out every individual tree, you create the most efficient system, and you only manifest the trees which are within each users's visible range. Similarly, particles wave/discrete duality comes from this idea. Individual particles do not even exist until they are being observed. By doing this, there is no necessity for the system to calculate every single movement and force each individual particle creates all throughout the universe.
The third argument for the existence of a simulation is the lack of civilizations that we have been able to contact. Its a sheer numbers game, the overwhelming number of stars and the fact that we were able to evolve into an intelligent civilization means we should have been in contact with thousands of others. They are nowhere to be found, because we're the only sample in the petri dish.
God does exist, perhaps it is better to call them Gods. Whether or not you want to call them that is your problem. There is no escape from the system, likely it is a system within a system, perhaps unto infinity.
