>If you need to postulate such amazing complexity just to say basically nothing in terms of realism, then you’ve already lost. Defenders of the Many-Worlds Int

>If you need to postulate such amazing complexity just to say basically nothing in terms of realism, then you’ve already lost. Defenders of the Many-Worlds Interpretation, and some other types of multiverse theory such as Eternal Inflation, would actually say that the multiverse idea is the simpler alternative, not the more complex one. Multiverse theories produce an abundance of universes, but the underlying description of those universes is typically simpler than alternatives that suppose a single, unique universe. Concepts such as wave function collapse or hidden variables, which actually add complexity to the theory, have to be introduced in order to get the theory to produce a unique observed reality. One could have argued with Aristarchus or Hubble that the idea that there were other solar systems, or other galaxies, added more complexity than was necessary to explain reality. From a broader perspective though, our reality would actually be stranger and more difficult to explain if the properties we observed of our solar system, or our galaxy, were the only ones that could exist. Ditto our universe, say the Everettians. Kepler desperately struggled to explain the properties of our solar system as the product of a unique and divine geometry before he discovered the more general truth [1], which allowed the existence of the infinity of alternative configurations which are now known to exist around other stars. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysterium_Cosmographicum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysterium_Cosmographicum