In modern cosmological discourse, the hypothesis is considered that our world is merely one among countless, and possibly even infinite, variants of the universe, where the fine-tuning of parameters is not a unique task but the result of random selection.

Cosmic Lottery: The Random Selection of Universes

In modern cosmological discourse, the hypothesis is considered that our world is merely one among countless, and possibly even infinite, variants of the universe, where the fine-tuning of parameters is not a unique task but the result of random selection. In this concept, a special role is given to the anthropic principle: it is precisely because of the multitude of possible worlds that only in one do the conditions for the emergence of an observer come together. This view radically changes our understanding of the cosmic structure, suggesting that our universe should not be seen as the exceptional product of a creative design, but rather as one of many variants where random coincidences have led to the emergence of a life-supporting environment. Such an approach gives new impetus to the quest to understand the fundamental laws of the world, inviting us to see the cosmos as an arena of endless possibilities and immeasurable mystery, where our role is determined by chance and the incredible variability of cosmic processes.

How can the statement about the number of universes in our multiverse be interpreted?

The statement about the number of universes in our multiverse is generally interpreted as an attempt to explain the apparent fine-tuning of our world’s parameters. The idea is that the so-called “number of universes” implies the existence of a huge (even infinite) number of variants, among which only our universe has those particular features that allow the emergence of life. In other words, our case is not unique in terms of cosmic laws, but rather the result of a random selection from a multitude of possibilities.

Such an approach serves to justify the anthropic principle: if there are infinitely many universes, it is entirely possible that most are not tuned for the emergence of life, and we observe precisely the universe in which the conditions permit the appearance of an observer. As noted in one excerpt published in the source “ link txt”:
"Some non-believing scientists were not at all surprised by all these precise correlations and declared all these coincidences random. They see the 'regularity' of the coincidences only in the fact that we, human beings, do exist, and if so, the tuning of the Universe’s parameters must be as it is. To justify the randomness of such coincidences, they proposed the idea that there exists an infinite number of different universes, and simply ours got lucky."

Thus, the statement about the vast number of universes is interpreted not as proof of the existence of many observable worlds, but rather as a conceptual model explaining why our world possesses exactly those characteristics that allow life. This view is seen as an alternative to hypotheses of targeted tuning or a unique creative design, suggesting that many "untuned" universes remain beyond our perception, while our universe stands out as a result of random selection.

Supporting citation(s):
"Some non-believing scientists were not at all surprised by all these precise correlations and declared all these coincidences random. They see the 'regularity' of the coincidences only in the fact that we, human beings, do exist, and if so, the tuning of the Universe’s parameters must be as it is. To justify the randomness of such coincidences, they proposed the idea that there exists an infinite number of different universes, and simply ours got lucky." (source: link txt)

It is also worth noting that this discussion emphasizes the idea that our universe is just one of many variants of cosmic structure, where only a fortunate coincidence partially leads to the emergence of conditions capable of sustaining life.