I've been obsessed with this New Scientist article I read recently about how there is not one universe, but there are multiverses. If you're familiar with Schrödinger's Cat, the multiverse theory implies that it doesn't matter if the cat is dead or alive when you open the box, there is another universe where the cat is the opposite.

So in the simplest scenario, imagine the world you live in, the world you know -- or at least the reality you know -- and that there is another one of you that does the exact opposite of what you do. That's the simple version because it implies binary choices. Now imagine how many multiverses there really must be. And then imagine what this means morally? The better a person I am in the universe I know, there must be another entangled me in different universe that is just as evil as I am good. So what's to compell me to be good?

Last week, Ed and I were talking about an article he'd read about how this world could be a simulation. I found a few papers out there on the topic so I'm not sure exactly which one he read, but it stuck with me. And now I wonder -- would you bother to run a simulation if the multiverse theory were true? Wouldn't the simulation spawn the extra multiverses it needed, then what would be the point of observing one over another?

Then, there's Dexter. I'm beginning to think that watching that show is actually taxing my mental health, but all of this ties in together. Dexter. What's wrong with being a serial killer? If, say in another universe, you're a doctor helping people live? There's a scene in the episode called Circle of Friends, where Dexter is talking to another killer in jail and asks, What do you normally feel?, and his friend answers, Nothing. Fucking nothing at all. So empty. But in our multiverses, there'd be a him somewhere that didn't feel empty. Would emptiness mean anything then?