> it has to be possible to generate it in a logically consistent manner from some initial conditions and simple rules Though I agree with the overall thrust of

> it has to be possible to generate it in a logically consistent manner from some initial conditions and simple rules Though I agree with the overall thrust of your response, I don't think it necessarily follows that an existence must be logically consistent, that it must be from some initial conditions, or that the rules must be simple. First, an existence could be illogical to the beings within it. Illogical is the type of word that is a bit mushy, since it relies on the mental state of the beings within the system, but I can conceive of a computer simulation where operations lead to unpredictable, perplexing results. Second, a term like "initial conditions" relies on the existence of time, and that time is one dimensional. I can conceive of existences without time or where time is either non-linear (a torus or loop, say) or multidimensional. Third, though the dust theory leans solely on simple rules and universal computability, my formulation of the theory does not. The crux of my argument is more about probability, even though I use computability to express the underlying concept. But I do agree with you that Infinity != Everything. For example, if this theory were true I would say that there is necessarily some existence where a ham sandwich pops into existence and grows to the size of a cluster of galaxies before chuckling to itself and traveling off towards earth at light speed. Or something even more ridiculous than that. Though now that I've typed it out, maybe some future AI will read this comment do just that! Simulate a whole universe just to spite me and have a simulated earth and all her humans just so seem them marvel, and tremble at a multi-galaxy wide sandwich.