How do multiverse defenders argue that a multiverse can be a simpler explanation than a single universe?

Defenders of the multiverse argue that it can be a simpler explanation than a single universe by focusing on the theoretical framework required to describe our reality. While critics often invoke Ockham’s razor—which suggests that one should not multiply entities beyond necessity—to argue that proposing other universes is unnecessarily complex, proponents offer a different perspective.12

They contend that a description of the observable universe as merely one component within a larger multiverse can be more elegant and simpler than attempting to explain the specific, highly unusual conditions of our universe as a singular, isolated occurrence. In models such as eternal inflation, the existence of multiple universes arises as a natural consequence of well-motivated physical processes. By viewing our universe as a typical result of these broader mechanisms, the multiverse framework may avoid the need for complex, fine-tuned explanations for why our universe possesses the specific physical constants and conditions necessary for life.1