This is the way. Life can only be recognized as such in the context where an absence of life is also present, but ultimately both (life and no-life) are just interpretations of what we call existence.

So I guess it depends on what you understand by “simulation”. What is really simulated as opossed to being “real”. Our reality is just an interpretation given by our senses, so in a sense it’s also a simulation of the real thing. Where’s the line that makes something really “real”?