My definition of the multi-verse is this: It is "All that is".
Such a definition tells us nothing about this multi-verse, because such a definition also applies to the universe.
I don't have to produce any proof of the multi-verse. If you don't wish to believe it, then don't believe it. It changes nothing.
You don't have to produce proof? Do you actually have any proof, or is this an unsubstantiated claim you are making? Isn't this just you saying, "I'm right and you're wrong so nyah nyah"? Why are you exempt from providing proof?
Please provide your proof that there is nothing beyond cosmic background radiation including other dimensions. Make sure it's testable, repeatable, and verifiable. Cough...
A bit rich for you to demand that I provide proof when you've just said that such a thing doesn't apply to you, doesn't it?
In any case, we have a model of the universe which fits pretty much exactly what we see in the real world. There is a ton of evidence saying that the model is correct and none to say that the model is incorrect. Given that, I don't see how you can turn around and say that the single universe theory is wrong when you have no evidence to support your claim that it is wrong and you have no evidence to support your multi verse claim.
The components of life created in the big bang? Energy from a higher dimension was released and as it moved into this lower frequency dimension it condensed into what we call matter. But still there is something missing, something your scientists still don't understand. What made those components come to life? You won't find it in your "big bang".
Higher dimensions? You've been watching too much Star Trek. All the dimensions that interact with the universe are part of the universe. They were created in the Big Bang. Your claim that energy from a higher dimension was released to cause the Big Bang is illogical, because such a higher dimension could not exist until AFTER the Big Bang.
Support my claim of dimensions and heaven? You made a claim, I countered with a claim. If you wish to provide proof that my claim isn't correct then we are all ears. Uh, good luck with that.
So why is it that your claims are to be taken as is without any sign of evidence anywhere, yet my claims are just wrong? Got anything to back up that position other than the fact that you really really wanna be right?
Show you how "God energy" is anything other than a made up word? Call it String Theory if you like, it doesn't matter. Or are you also going to deny string theory? How energy is dimensional? EMR energy is not dimensional, string theory energy is. It doesn't just inhabit dimensions, it creates them.
Ah, so you are arbitrarily redefining words in order to support your claim? Does that mean I can prove the existence of God if I define God to be my television?
Stephen Hawking just guessing? Ask him about dark matter, he'll start guessing really quick...
He's got much more experience with the theory behind it than you do, or are you a dark matter expert in a position to claim that he is wrong just because he doesn't know anything about it? Hawking may not know everything there is to know, but he knows a hell of a lot more than you about it, so can you give me a single good reason why i should ignore him and instead rely on your opinions about it?
Ask any scientist if they've ever created something and they'll go on and on about how they "created" this particle or that machine, then point out that they didn't actually create anything they simply assembled or disassembled something. Then ask them again if they've ever truly created something, they'll start guessing really quick.
What, you want them to create a universe on their own now?