I understand, completely agree, and plan to continue digging myself into this pedantic hole anyway thank you very much. Interesting that a difference of scale

I understand, completely agree, and plan to continue digging myself into this pedantic hole anyway thank you very much. Interesting that a difference of scale alone determined the nature of a thing! More interesting, perhaps, are the number of factors that aren't considered! Would a simulation of a Peruvian ant on the Tibetan Plateau be real or imagined? What about a simulation of an ant after 20 years of climate change? How about an ant in space or experiencing the Big Bang? On the other hand, is a simulation of a black hole real or imaginary? What about simulations of the history of the universe involving dark matter and dark energy? I appreciate a sibling comment's (thanks marshray) suggestion that there exists a spectrum of theoreticalness. Theoreticity? > the simulation in this paper is theoretical to a much larger degree than that of the teapot.