[Rurudyne]

Some people need a proverbial infinite number of monkeys to avoid the thought of Shakespeare.

[sphinx]

Some people need a proverbial infinite number of monkeys to avoid the thought of Shakespeare.

Bingo!

I love multiverse theory. My first observation when the subject comes up is that it implies an infinity of universes without a God, and an infinity of universes with a God. So: in which do we live, and how would we tell?

Tip-toeing on into the zen of infinities, there can be only one infinity that is godless. But since God or Gods can come in an infinite variety of numbers and types, there would be an infinity of infinities of universes with one or more deities. Pascal's wager is not an even balance.

[AndyJackson]

It is exactly the same issue and same fallacy. The solution to explaining the singular genius of Shakespeare is instead to posit the collaboration of two [or more] such geniuses, e.g. the explanation of a highly improbable occurance is multiple such improbable occurances.

The solution here, to the problem of understanding quantum mechanics is to posit an infinity of such simultaneous problems to understand. It's utter nonsense and provides no path forward for understanding what happens in the world that we can observe or at least the world that I inhabit and observe and observe all of you observing, whether you are separately real or not.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

"Some people need a proverbial infinite number of monkeys to avoid the thought of Shakespeare."

Wow. This is worthy of Chesterton.