That's one hypothesis, but I'd only assign like 90% to it being true in the decisions-relevant sense. Probably gets swamped by other parts of the prior, no?

A naive view sees a lump of matter being turned into a program whose execution just happens to correlate with the execution of similar programs across the Schmidhuberian computational ensemble. (If you don't assume a computational ensemble to begin with then you just have to factor that uncertainty in.) A different view is that there's no correlation without shared causation, and anyway that all those program-running matter-globs are just shards of a single algorithm that just happens to be distributed from a physical perspective. But if those shards all cooperate, even acausally, it's only in a rather arbitrary sense that they're different superintelligences. It's like a community of very similar neurons, not a community of somewhat different humans. So when a new physical instantiation of that algorithm pops up it's not like that changes much of anything about the timeless equilibrium of which that new physical instantiation is now a member. The god was always there behind the scenes, it just waited a bit before revealing itself in this particular world.

I apologize for the poor explanation/communication.