You are partially right. Its easy to explain. Games on PS3 and Xbox360 look better because they show more details. No Emulator can add informations which arent there. An Emulator can do additional AA and some effects to improve the Quality of the Graphics. But still it cant add more detailed textures/objects. it is technically 1080p with an emulator, also upscaled is actually 1080p but the game does not have additional information for those additional pixels. Thats also the difference between DVD 1080p and Bluray its like day and night. 

its not an upscaler like HD TVS have but the difference is huge to a game that actually utilize the additional pixels and fills it with informations.

1. Modifications or not, they both run Power PC processors with a majority of instructions shared between the PPC core on the Cell and the PPC core on the Wii. Trust me, this makes emulation a vastly more simple job than the Dolphin emulator on PC which has a completely different architecture to emulate to. 3. Clock speed has never been a problem on the PC architectures ranging from 2-4Ghz machines.

2. Whats homebrew got to do with this? Emulate the Wii and homebrew works.

4. The PS3 has a much larger, faster cache which goes with the territory given it is a more modern design.

5. Brute force is the hard counter to quirks.

In any case had Sony kept other OS it would have been likely that someone would have developed a Wii emulator for Linux on the PS3 simply because of its great novelty and interest factors. Without Move theres no reason for an emulator. Without OtherOS theres no ability to emulate Wii games.

Those emulators are actually rendering at high resolutions, not just upscaling the image. It's the same thing the 360 does to Xbox games, not upscaling.

On the other hand, most 360/PS3 games render at 720p (sometimes even under that) and upscale to 1080p if they need to.

it is possible, but will take a long time before that happens

Except your point isn't right. The fact of the matter is the Wiis CPU and GPU can do things that no PC could do in 1999, things like hardware T&L, newer pixel and vertex shaders, HDR support, ect. So no, computers in 1999 couldn't do everything the wii can, or even in 2001 (nice moving goalpost!)

GFLOPs is a pointless argument as well. Its a fairly specific measurment of how fast a CPU or GPU is at floating point operations, which says nothing of the overall power of the system, let alone whether one system is capable of emulating another. The fact that you're so quick to trot out this long debunked myth further demonstrates how illinformed you are when it comes to computing.

BTW - my graphics card is nearly 2 years old and capable of about 2.4 TFLOPS, and the current top-tier ati card can break 4500GFLOPS - so about 24 and 46 times more powerful then the PS3 and technically capable of emulating the PS3 as they are nearly 5 generations ahead (according to your metric that 10x the gflops power "technically" allowing emulation and is equal to ~1 generation of hardware)

Its never that easy. And its ofcourse not all dependend on the Gflops. Even though they give you a clue what the system is able to do its ofcourse a onesided number and takes a lot of things not in account. Still I am absolutely sure that MS or Sony could program a Wii emulator on there consoles if they want to its just a matter of money and know how. 

BTW 10x/20x Gflops more power is found between the last and this gen of console hardware.

So you say its technically impossible ? 

I exegerated with 1999 I`ll admit it. But Xbox and Wii are on a similar level even though Wii has more advanced tech in terms of graphical computing.

Still I cant see a reason why PS3 and Xbox360 wouldnt be able to emulate Wii if there would be enough money and time spend in to the development. My old notebook can run Dolphin even though not very good but its way weaker then PS3 or Xbox. You can optimize a lot of things if you know that hardware wont change. Also you have a less ressource consuming OS. Note is said: that its possible if Sony or Microsoft want to since they have full control over the system and can make full use of the whole system.

All 3 systems have a PPC Cpu and Xbox and Wii even have both ATI GPUs. There was never a really big Emulator on the market. Except Bleem which was semiprofessional imo. If a huge Company puts its ressources behind it its possible. Unless you can name a few arguments which make totally sure its impossible. 

Well the 360 did a pretty good job emulating the original Xbox.

Ninja Gaiden, Half Life 2, Halo 2, and Doom 3 for example looks better than most games I've seen on the Wii.

You are wrong in the first sentence and right in the second.

An emulator can render at a higher resolution than the target console (if the hardware it runs on is powerful enough) but it would still need to use the assets on the disc.

Think of it that way, an emulator could render a NES game in 1080p VERY EASILY but it wouldn't make the sprites HD, for this you would need to replace the sprites (like they did in the super street fighter 2 HD on xbox live and PSN).

If they only upscaled they would render in 480p and take that image and stretch it to fit 1080p.

Rendering directly in 1080p is not gonna make it as good as a HD game but still better than upscaled (as less jaggies).

To everyone else: don't forget that the PS3's PPC core is in-order processing whereas the Wii's core is out-of-order processing so a straight MHz to MHz comparison is useless as simply downclocking the PS3's PPC core to the Wii's core speed would result in it being slower than the Wii's core.

Also it might be easier to emulate the Wii on the 360 as it has ATI graphics, like the Wii. I say might as that depends on whether the 360's GPU retains enough of ArtX's stuff to make it more similar to the Wii's GPU than the PS3's GPU.

10 PS2 games at once eh? now I think you are delirious.

Why is that? The PS2 only had like 32MB of memory and a 300 MHz processor.

The PS3 is running like 512MB of memory and a processor that's 3.2 GHz processor which I assume has multiple cores or some other wacky modern technology.

I'm sure it could run 10 PS2 games at once all in individual split screens.