By multiverse are we talking about the Many Worlds interpretation? If so I think it is actually a misconception that there can be no evidence for this. Many Worlds would better be named "decoherence" and decoherence is testable and falsifiable according to several sources I can think of. Example: http://lesswrong.com/lw/q4/decoherence_i..._testable/
The LessWrong quantum physics sequence does a good job of explaining decoherence if you start from the beginning. Eventually it gets kinda over my head but this interpretation has numerous advantages over any single universe version of QM. Many Worlds is gradually becoming the accepted theory of QM.
What does that mean? It means that there are googols of versions of me out there which (among many more wildly different variations) only differ in the location of a mole on my ass. That's a lot of Me's for God to love. Seems kind of problematic for religion, but then again so did evolution and they dealt with that somehow.
The LessWrong quantum physics sequence does a good job of explaining decoherence if you start from the beginning. Eventually it gets kinda over my head but this interpretation has numerous advantages over any single universe version of QM. Many Worlds is gradually becoming the accepted theory of QM.
What does that mean? It means that there are googols of versions of me out there which (among many more wildly different variations) only differ in the location of a mole on my ass. That's a lot of Me's for God to love. Seems kind of problematic for religion, but then again so did evolution and they dealt with that somehow.