I'm publishing a novel titled SCHRÖDINGER’S DACHSHUND. In it, a physics student goes around the bend from figuring out the existential consequences of many-worlds scenarios. This is eclectic literary fiction, but I'd like to check with card-carrying physicists about something: 1) Is it compatible with at least one many-worlds scenario that when Maestoso the Dachshund chose between taking a nap or not, the universe split in two? In one, he napped. In the other he didn't. 2) If this be true, the residents of one of the worlds were creatio ex Dachshund. They “owe” their existence to the actions of a hound in another dimension. 3) It is possible that this is our world. Our universe was created by Maestoso the Dachshund. Determining whether 3 is good news or bad news may constitute the greatest intellectual challenge of all time. That's why I use fiction to grapple with Big Questions. The physicist in SCHRÖDINGER’S DACHSHUND develops a religion around this discovery. Who can blame him? Generally speaking, how compatible are 1, 2, 3 with many-worlds scenarios?