One way the simulation argument starts is: Is this the ultimate nature of reality? A universe out of thin void? One possibility is that all possible universes e

One way the simulation argument starts is: Is this the ultimate nature of reality? A universe out of thin void? One possibility is that all possible universes exist, we just have survivorship bias. But we're blessed with poetry and rainbows and Goldilocks constants, which seems like a very lucky draw. So we proceed to wonder if it's a simulation. That would mean the universe is interesting because it was designed or selected as such. This answers some local questions, and punts the existentialism into the simulating world. My argument is that a simulation need not look like the Matrix, where there's a machine running in real time so that the simulating and simulated universes share a timeline. The simulants might just be doing the relevant computations in whatever graph-traversing order, and printing them out or whatever. The computed information would make up our universe, it would be the essence of it. The universe would have come into "being" just by being selected out of the big entropic soup of all possible 4D log books to write. As for "so what," it's just amateur philosophy, no guarantee you'll find it interesting.