> A and then claims anyone who disagrees with this conclusion must have faulty logic. A huge chunk of reasoning behind parallel universes seems to be skipped an

> A and then claims anyone who disagrees with this conclusion must have faulty logic. A huge chunk of reasoning behind parallel universes seems to be skipped and I have trouble taking it seriously every time it is brought up. I think your scepticism is generally warranted. There is a reason the many-worlds interpretation is called an interpretation, just like the Copenhagen interpretation and others. The interpretations cannot be logically deduced from the experimental evidence we have. They are attempts to try to make sense of the results. As for book recommendations, I have really liked Tim Maylin's "Philosophy of Physics: Quantum Theory" because of the precision and clarity he brings to the discussion. I should mention, though, that I've got a physics degree.