Yes, I know, which is why I brought up the idea of inconsistent physics between universes.

I’m not questioning whether the paper’s math is accurate. We both seem to agree the hypothesis can’t be proven in the first place.

I am treating it as a thought experiment, which is why I’m questioning how math can prove a negative to a fairly ambiguous question in the first place.

It’s in the realm of disproving determinism and flying spaghetti monsters.

What is the main point of the thought experiment?

If we consider a possibility from all sides, then whether or not we could similate a universe that follows different physics is one of those sides. We don’t have the power to do that, but we can create programs that simulate different physics. Stands to reason that not every universe may follow the same fundamental laws.

I don’t agree that it’s equally unlikely to be the first as the last, either, if the universes branch off. A tree has thousands of leaves and only one trunk.

Doesn’t this assume all universes follow the same physical rules?