Universe being mathematically consistent and being simulated are completely orthogonal concepts.
On second reading though it seems like all you're proposing is a mental model for 'analog' computation; that it's like outsourcing the computation to a lower level of hardware. Then yes I agree with that.
As for the validity of simulation hypothesis itself, I'd say it's essentially religion in disguise*. It's unfalsifiable by definition too, and personally I apply Occam's razor on the idea, but obviously I can't disprove it. The question can't be "is it true", but it's fine to ask "is it a useful (or at least thought-provoking) metaphor?" (in a given context).
___
* Most religions, in my view, can be broken down to the sum of: a) simulation hypothesis of sorts (universe run by Creator), b) code of ethics with mnemonic narratives, c) ceremonies, that covers most of it analytically speaking.
Google tells me that this phrase has been used twice on the internet, both times by you on HN. I Googled it because I thought it was an interesting expression and wondered whether it was in popular use.
Ed: honestly though, it's kind of surprising no one else has independently come up with the same phrase. I know I'm not the only one thinking about things like this.
I had a pretty convincing revelation last night that the simulation was run by insects. I could only get back to sleep by ridiculing myself for such a derivative thought. Or is there a reason it's universal?
...that or the much older idea that if the whole universe is the dream of a dragon (or a butterfly or Chuang Chou) then let's not do anything that's too startling or implausible so we don't wake them up and end it all!
If we accept it, for argument's sake, then what's happening is essentially delegating the computation to the ultra-meta-computer that runs the simulation.