arXiv · 2509.04918
Holistic Versus Fragmented Multiverses: Empirical Access via Causal and Grounding Signatures
Abstract
Can multiverse hypotheses ever receive empirical support? Critics argue that multiverse scenarios posit unobservable entities, face severe underdetermination, or fall outside the bounds of science. This chapter challenges that view by offering a naturalistic metaphysical counterpoint to Bayesian approaches, distinguishing fragmented from holistic multiverses. Scientific proposals are almost always holistic: they embed universes within a unifying physical or metaphysical structure that can, in principle, leave empirical signatures inside the universes. I develop a typology of such signatures and show how it applies to leading scenarios from quantum theory, cosmology, and string theory. This framework clarifies why objections such as the `this universe' objection and a newly articulated generalization, the epistemic isolation objection, fail against scientifically motivated multiverses. The upshot is a qualified defence: while fragmented multiverses remain empirically inaccessible, certain holistic multiverses could, in principle, be supported by the same epistemic standards used elsewhere in physics.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Baptiste Le Bihan. 2025-09-05. Holistic Versus Fragmented Multiverses: Empirical Access via Causal and Grounding Signatures. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.04918
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.