[PaulDavisThe1st]

Sorry, but no.

Simulations are systems which have various rules built into them which govern (entirely) the behavior of the components of the system (at whatever levels the rules apply).

A given simulation may have rules that are believed or are intended to generate behavior within it which are similar to some other system (e.g. what we experience as "reality"). But it may just as well have an entirely different set of rules intended to create entirely different, even unknown and unpredictable, behaviors.

Any similarity between a given simulation and what we experience as reality is a property of that particular simulation. There is absolutely no reason why a simulation that is utterly different from our reality could not exist (and indeed, almost certainly already does).

[raxxorraxor]

Simulation in abstract implies to imitate something. Further abstracted to a system of rules removes the reference and it become equivalent to a lot of concepts. It is true that the meaning evolved, but that is probably just an effect because we try to understand reality. And creating a simulation is the test for that understanding. That in best cases fit perceived reality if developed to that goal.

A simulation does not have to model reality and multiple simulations trivially exist. But I don't see why that would imply anything for reality as well from that.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

I apologize. I misread your comment that I was replying to as stating that (to paraphrase) the simulation is always modelling reality. Total misread on my part. Very sorry about that.