I am not questioning whether the simulation topic is outside science. I am asking what evidence there is or could be to resolve whether we are or not.
Living in a simulation has been a topic for philosophy since at least Descartes, with his 'evil demon not less powerful than deceitful'. Zuangzhi's 'Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man' could be argued to be a statement of the same idea. What I am interested in is, is can we get beyond speculation and make headway on this? How does the evidence stand, what tools do we have, and what implications might the different answers have?
Here I quickly summarize some of the main positions:
"Are you Living in a Computer Simulation?" [PDF] (2003), Nick Bostrom, makes the case we are in a simulation, on the balance of probabilities
https://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.pdf
"Quantized gravitational responses, the sign problem, and quantum complexity" (2017), Ringel & Kovrizhin, makes the case such a simulation is impossible using classical computers. But that leaves quantum computers.
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/9/e1701758.full
"The Case for Libertarian Compatibilism: A Brief Overview" (2014) gives a more detailed idea of what being in a simulation might mean, as a kind of peer-to-peer reality
https://philosophycommons.typepad.com/flickers_of_freedom/2014/08/the-case-for-libertarian-compatibilism-a-brief-overview.html
"Fermi Paradox: a simulation solution" [PDF] demonstrates a serious argument that the simulation hypothesis is the best answer to the Fermi Paradox. Although as recently discussed on here, the existence of this paradox is open to dispute, and relies on a range of assumptions.
https://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~aldous/Research/Ugrad/mark_yu_haihan.pdf
Anyone got anything else evidence based? Any models, or discussions of implications?
Another Interdasting Link:
Saints and Simulators: Did Bostrom Prove the Existence of God?
https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2019/01/24/saints-and-simulators-did-bostrom-prove-the-existence-of-god/
Moar Thoughts:
I would like to argue that the topic (especially the search for proof for it) is rather useless. With a search for evidence, this topic is very similar to the topic of the search for evidence that God exists - which is, naturally, an assumption that brings the term "God" into a field it simply cannot exist in. You can't search for an ontological evidence for something that by definition isn't in the ontological field (or, at least not in the human sense of ontology).
If you want to talk in the logical field, then sure, you can present many arguments for and against the simulation argument, but from your description I see that you know at least some that's enough.
So, my point is, the question is pretty much "worthless" (not really, or else I wouldn't want to answer it, so it is worth replying to at the very least), as a search for evidence in simply not realizing the difference between the fields in which evidence lies and the simulation argument exists.
And for a final note, I think Kurzgesagt (a Youtube channel) presented some excellent points on the hard time it'll be for "aliens" to create a simulation in which we exists (although it does assume these "aliens" live in the same world we live in, with the same physical laws limitations we have, but it's still a nice video to watch - they have amazing animations skills…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlTKTTt47WE
It must be tough for BELIEVERS, who have to Believe They Know What IS, or What Isn't.
Of course, from their stance they probably think it's tough to be OK with Not Knowing!
