I'm not coming from the matrix point of view, I don't mix serious evolutionary discourse with fantasy movies. I'ma student of cosmological Darwinianism it's a Darwinian variant on the Multiverse theory. I don't think there are TRILLIONS of me elsewhere. I wouldn't rule it out, but that's not my argument here. In theory, I think there are others elsewhere. Given all I know about cosmological Darwinianism... I think some universes out survived other universes and we are just one of some by-product universes surviving today. This does not mean Trillions of me had to exist, because I wouldn't have evolved until this universe. Those other universes probabally still exist, but the planets there are most likely long dead because they weren't the fittests to survive. My reasoning is that some of those universes were unable to create a planet with a Goldilocks value of 0.0007 which is just right for yielding the richness of elements that we need for an interesting and life-supporting chemistry. Because I understand universes that have what it takes to survive and reproduce come to predominate in the multiverse. What it takes includes lasting long enough to reproduce. Because the act of reproduction takes place in blackholes, successful universes must have what it takes to make black holes. This ability entails various other properties. For Example, the tendency for matter to condense into clouds and then stars is a prerequisite to making black holes. Stars also are the precursors to the development of interesting chemistry, and hence life. So there has to have been a darwinian natural selection of unvierses in the multiverse, directly favoring the evolution of blackhole fecundity and indirectly favouring the production of life. Nobel prize-winning physicist Murray Gell-mann said: "that Theoretical physicist may not be wrong. Further more, The key difference between the genuinely extravagant God hypothesis and the apparently extavagant multiverse hypothesis is one of statistical improbability. The Multiverse may seem extravagant in sheer number of universes. But if each one of those Universes is simple in its fundamental laws, we are still not postulating anything highly improbable. The very opposite has to be said of any kind of intelligence."