The simulation hypothesis isn't about whether we're 'in' a simulation. It's about whether the distinction between 'real' and 'simulated' is even coherent.\n\nIf the base reality and the simulated one have identical causal structure, what work is the distinction doing? The question isn't 'is this real?' — it's 'is this consistent?'\n\nConsistency is the only proof we get. And it's enough.