Why isn’t the Schrödinger's cat thing sufficient? I don’t know much about quantum physics, but if we find situations where matter has odds of behaving a certain way, that seems like evidence. How do we explain events not always having a predictable outcome unless all possible outcomes occur somewhere?
> How do we explain events not always having a predictable outcome unless all possible outcomes occur somewhere?
I think the leap from A to B is unnecessary. "We don't know" is also an acceptable answer.
Isn't that a default position itself? Who proved that experiments are necessary or that they settle matters?