>>10883883My idea is that it only exists to get rid of the idea of probability. Like
>>10898413says it just exists theoretically so that you don't have to have wavefunctions, and some fedora can just keep saying "but in a different timeline, X particle will break off in Y dimensions where Z exists, and its all 100 percent proven because muh multiverse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111111111111111" If a worldline breaks off equally due to every event, then a physicist can cut corners pretty easily. So, in reality, I think that the multiverse is just a half-truth. It's a playground fantasy with only a few good applications to real life.
I've done some thinking about it personally, and it only makes sense if you somehow bend the laws of physics momentarily. Remember that everything has to balance to zero in the Newtonian mechanics, so if you roll a dice (1 through 6), then you'll eventually end up in one of six universes. If you go back in time in each of the six universes that were generated at the dice roll, you could see exactly where the dice rolled and how the physics of the environment affected the dice to get the outcome, but at the moment that the random event happened it would need to affect the dice in such a way that the outcome was purely random. Not only that but energy and mass must be conserved in macroscopic terms. So in reality, maybe there is no real alternate universes being generated because everything can only happen if you apply a force to the matter around you... thus Newton's first law.
But the problem of course is in the Quantum realm there are no Newtonian mechanics, and everything is just a cloud of probability, so the underlying universe that we exist in is purely indeterministic.
