funky@, of course, question away!!!
as you may have noticed in my comments elsewhere, i'm not a big fan of most thought-experiments and while they may be fantasy, i don't see them as being synonymous with imagination. i perceive imagination differently than what's usually served up by the term these days.
most thought experiments i encounter simply perpetuate rationalism. which formulation of such doesn't matter here. for instance, ancaps and AP's exist in about the same boat. in AP's case, the loudest proponents actively seek to 'ground' their analysis in rationalism and see their 'solution' as a logical conclusion, which inherently contradictory to this supposedly anti-civ project, particularly one that upholds rationalism as its basis where contradiction remains anathema! rationalism is a product of civilized living; of distance from a living, pulsating, non-linear world.
in ancapism's case, such a distance is already un-problematic for its technocrats, and the removal of oneself from everyday living, much less socializing, might simply be an absurd case of solipsistic masturbation, if techno-modernity didn't itself indicate those directions already.
what i sense common in both is the presumption that our joie de vivre is conditional, causal and perennially deferred. and i don't for a moment feel the world needs more rationalism, but more joy and imagination.
in sum, the presuppositions of nearly all thought experiments i encounter shout far more loudly against joy/gratitude and imagination than do the stated formulations such experiments.
there are other, perhaps, deeper problems i sense, but i'll keep this from completely wall-o-texting.
edit typos and clarity