> note how the simulated world in GTA5 is based not on atoms That's actually my point. GTA5 doesn't work on atoms but the simulation of our actual universe wo

> note how the simulated world in GTA5 is based not on atoms That's actually my point. GTA5 doesn't work on atoms but the simulation of our actual universe would have to. Any NPC in our simulated universe can turn any building into rubble, turn any sand into glass, empty any lake, divert any river, put any drop of water under a microscope, mix any chemicals and watch their reactions, put any atoms in a particle accelerator, draw an animated stick figure with an electron microscope. I'm arguing we can never simulate a universe because we'd need a computer larger than the entire universe to do it. I'm arguing that the thought experiment of "simulations will continue to get better until we can put A.I NPCs in a simulation of our universe and it will be impossible for them to tell the difference" is itself impossible. The argument for why it's "likely" we are in a simulation is because it's argued it's inevitable we'll create such simulations ourselves. In doing that there will be more simulated people than not. It a huge assumption that "it's inevitable we'll create such simulations ourselves". If that is not inevitable then the likelihood we're in one drops dramatically. A counter argument is we'll simulate a smaller universe for our NPCs but that argument doesn't really hold as it would argue that every universe is a simulation running in a larger universe to infinity. That would require infinite complexity