I'm downvoted here <sigh>, but the point I wanted to make is to consider the likely states of the universe vs. the less likely. For macroscopic objects like ou

I'm downvoted here <sigh>, but the point I wanted to make is to consider the likely states of the universe vs. the less likely. For macroscopic objects like our brains, a Boltzmann brain fluctuating into existence in the next moment is virtually impossible (very unlikely) relative to a human on earth being present/alive for this state of the universe and the next state. Consider all possible states of the universe, shouldn't we see more states with self-replicators and related probable objects vs. Boltzmann brains fluctuating into existence? This wikipedia page has some references to the statistical mechanics which are helpful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluctuation_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluctuation_theorem "...from a macroscopic point of view, it would describe complex processes running in reverse. For example, a jet engine running in reverse, taking in ambient heat and exhaust fumes to generate kerosene and oxygen. Nevertheless the size of such a system makes this observation almost impossible to occur. Such a process is possible to be observed microscopically because, as it has been stated above, the probability of observing a "reverse" trajectory depends on system size and is significant for molecular machines if an appropriate measurement instrument is available. This is the case with the development of new biophysical instruments such as the optical tweezers or the atomic force microscope. Crooks fluctuation theorem has been verified through RNA folding experiments.[7]"