Ransford
Thanks for commenting.
Look around. You are in a single universe. If you mean 1 and only 1 universe , then you have misinterpreted the phrase. If you mean to postulate miltivers, then you have it backward -there is no unique evidence that more than our universe exists. That would require evidence. (The multiverse is an interpretation of QM. Many interpretations of QM exist. To accept a multiverse requires observation evidence that rejects all the other interpretations and does not reject multiverse) .
I like a modified Bohm Interpretation (BI) with a partice light (photon) being directed by a pilot wave. The weakness of BI is it omits how and where the pilot wavw originates. Consider General Relativity. Matter warps space ( medium like an aether) ant the warp directs matter. So, the pilot wave in the BI is caused by matter. (Unity of GR and the small?)
The advantage of BI is that there is an experiment that rejects all QM interpretation except the modified BI.
The following papers present an experiment that is easily done that rejects a wave like nature of the light (photon) and by extention the electron.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc0mfCssV32dDhDgwqLJjpw
Then play the video titled Photon Diffraction
http://intellectualarchive.com/?link=item&id=1603
"Diffraction experiment and its Stoe photon simulation program rejects wave models of light" click on mse42MY.pdf .
As you said more documentation than 10 pages allow except as a reference.
Science logic has to have some postulates. The paper postulated the emergence philosophy was a Emergence Principle of the universe. From that it follows the single TOE exists.
Another thing to note, the QM model as a probabilistic model is an indiator of a set of agents unknown but existing. I think they are my plenum (continous that supports wave action and hods matter). This was mentioned.
If you chose another assumption, find the data.
BTW. In the STOE model there has to be a Source (at the center of spiral galaxies) and a Sink (elliptical galaxies). These have to come and go from somewhere, perhaps another type of universe. But not a 3D+time.
There is considerably more evidence to support the Emercence Principle than the multiverse from QM.
I regard words/concepts such as intent, free will, conscious, mind as being without merit in science because they lack sufficient definition. Look at these papers, they use the same words and mean different things. For example, look at the phrasing of "Delayed Choice experiment". Especially "choice" as if that is what is being measued - Its not. Like the ancient Greeks the matter has no "Choice" or other human abstract quality. My papers above show there is a deterministic model to explain Young's and Hodge's experiments.
Hodge