Do "infinite probabilities" hurt multiverse theories? I got some good responses to my last thread on here I thought I'd try one more. I'm wondering about the multiverse theories where whenever a quantum 'decision' is made, the universe branches out into versions of itself in which each of the possibilities actually occurred. I understand this idea springs from a very literal, minimalist interpretation of shrodingers wave equation, which says nothing about the 'colllapse' that leads to a specific outcome. Now here's my question. Is the idea that, "if every possible result occurs, then the whole notion of probabilities is destroyed," do serious damage to such multiverse interpretations of quantum mechanics? I know there is plenty of mathematical research involving the study and comparing of infinities. It seems like it would apply here. Just like the infinite set of all numbers is bigger than that of just the even ones, the infinite set of high-probability quantum outcomes, is greater than that of low-probability ones. Am I possibly confusing conceptual tools with 'real things' here though? I as a good analogy what happens if you consider a spaciously infinite universe. We can say right now, "brown dwarf stars are more common than red giants." To me the argument I mentioned is like saying that, "because the universe is infinite, there are just as many red as brown stars." Obviously that's not very helpful, and it makes perfect sense to control for the infinity by looking for stars per unit of space. So for any section of the universe, this proportion of stars will hold up. Can't we do something similar with the multiverse theories where we say, "within this portion of uber-space (tm) there will be this many decaying particles, out of the total," for example? I wouldn't be asking this if I hadn't read so many serious suggestions of what I mention. Thanks for your time. Jeff.