[punpunia]

Are you sure that the probability that reality being a simulation is identical to the probability that the parent reality is itself a simulation? For us to be in a simulation, we cannot exist in the top-level reality, so let's arbitrarily say 10^100-1/10^100 chance. For our parent reality to also be a simulation, we cannot be in the top reality or the children of the top reality, which should be a slightly less likely scenario. So it seems like the probabilities are not equal.

[snakeyjake]

It is true the chances are not equal.

But it's close enough to ∞-1/∞ to not merit further analysis so I chose to round.

Edit: wait, I think that the chance that WE'RE the top level host of quadrillions upon quadrillions of simulations being run in this universe by intelligences beyond our comprehension in trillions of galaxies and the chance that we're a simulation being run in a top level reality are the same. How can they not be?

[punpunia]

Sure but I think infinite here is doing some conceptual heavy lifting and is making a fundamental assumption about how many universes a universe can simulate and to what fidelity. So if we replace infinity with 'a very large number', I think certainty turns into improbability, which feels to be a much weaker "argument".

[Atlas667]

Without enough knowledge they definitely are equal. How do you know THIS isn't top-level reality?

You can't say this isnt the top-level reality because of your belief of escape.

Only if you can confirm this is a simulation then the chances of getting to top-level reality do become higher the more you escape.

But then you'd also have to know if you're moving outward or inward in order to verifiably raise the chances of getting to top-level reality.

[punpunia]

"Without enough knowledge they definitely are equal." Wouldn't it be, "Without enough knowledge, they could be equal."? Since we do not know if we are in a simulation, why would we assume we are not or that we are?