Thanks Robin for the very interesting response. You mention the simulation hypothesis. I wrote about David Chalmers book on this earlier:
You are right that whether we are in a simulation or in a created universe that we can only guess at what lies outside. But, in both cases, something must be outside. This is a major point of Chalmers. If the simulator is a teenage girl having fun, or a scientist using us for experimental purposes, an Ultimate Universe must exist. No simulation can occur without a simulator. As Chalmers said, it was enough to make him believe in God if he could get over the idea that God demands worship. It's only atheistic physicalism that posits this as universe, or a metaverse as an acciddental, purposeless standalone entity.
If we are in a created universe or a simulation, it is very natural to give thought to the simulator-creator. It's also natural, as I point out, to come to ideas based on what we can observe even as we can consider the nature of an artist merely by studying his or her work. Then there is the idea that a simulator-creator wants to be known in some way and has provided some means of gaining at least some very limited knowledge.
