(July 26, 2013 at 9:02 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote:(July 26, 2013 at 1:00 am)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: I meant as in comparison to the God hypothesis. If you had to choose between (a) the multiverse theory or (b) the God hypothesis, which of the two would be the simplest explanation? It would be (a) of course because it's more consistent with reality as we understand it.
Actually, the simplest explanation would be God in that case. That was the point of my post: if you posit the multiverse hypothesis, then you're going against Occam's Razor to potentially an infinite degree. Occam's Razor just has to do with which hypothesis accounts for the data least redundantly, not which is more consistent with reality as we usually understand it (i.e naturally rather than supernaturally).
I don't agree. God would have to be infinitely more complex than the sum of the universes in a multi-verse.
If the process that produced the universe can be repeated (with or without variation) then the number of times it might have occurred doesn't really increase the complexity.
