Maybe in Another Life Explained: Quantum Choices, Multiverse Theory, and the Power of One Decision
#TalkNerdyToMe® Staff Writer
Let’s begin with a question that has ruined perfectly good showers:
What if that one decision changed everything?
Not the dramatic ones. Not the wedding vows or the cross-country moves.
The tiny ones.
The “Should I stay for one more drink?” ones.
In Maybe in Another Life, Taylor Jenkins Reid takes a single, deceptively small decision and splits reality in two. The result isn’t just romantic fiction. It’s narrative quantum mechanics. It’s multiverse theory in heels. It’s philosophy disguised as feelings.
And it works because the premise taps directly into something wired into the human brain: the obsession with alternate timelines.
This isn’t just a love story.
It’s a thought experiment about destiny, agency, regret, and the terrifying freedom of choice.
The Premise: One Bar. One Choice. Two Universes.
Hannah runs into her high school ex at a party in Los Angeles. History flares up. Chemistry resurfaces. It’s messy and magnetic and loaded.
At the end of the night, she faces a fork:
Go home with him.
Go home with her friend.
That’s it.
Reid alternates chapters between the two outcomes. Each decision births a different timeline. Different relationships. Different tragedies. Different joys.
The brilliance is structural.
Instead of asking “What if?” in the abstract, the book answers it.
Both.
Both happened.
Many-Worlds Theory: The Physics Behind the Fiction
The structure mirrors a real scientific interpretation known as the Many-Worlds interpretation, proposed by physicist Hugh Everett III in 1957.
In standard quantum mechanics, particles exist in superposition — multiple states at once — until observed.
Everett suggested something radical:
The wave function never collapses.
All possible outcomes occur.
Each outcome exists in its own branching universe.
So when a quantum event happens, reality doesn’t choose. It splits.
In fiction, Hannah’s decision operates like a quantum measurement.
Stay.
Leave.
Reality branches.
Reid isn’t claiming physics is romantic. But she’s using its conceptual scaffolding to explore something deeply human: the anxiety that there’s one correct timeline and we might miss it.
Many-Worlds offers a strange comfort:
You didn’t ruin your life.
You just followed one branch.
Quantum Decision Theory: Why Humans Don’t Decide Like Spreadsheets
Traditional economics says humans are rational decision-makers. We weigh pros and cons. We calculate expected utility. We choose optimally.
Reality says: absolutely not.
Quantum decision theory borrows mathematical principles from quantum probability to explain why human decision-making is often context-dependent, emotionally influenced, and non-linear.
People:
Change preferences based on framing.
Hold contradictory desires simultaneously.
Make different choices depending on question order.
Feel one thing and decide another.
That’s not irrational chaos.
It’s interference patterns.
Just like quantum particles exhibit wave-like interference, human cognition shows overlapping emotional states that influence outcomes.
Hannah doesn’t choose from a sterile vacuum.
She chooses from longing. Nostalgia. Fear. Hope.
That’s quantum behavior in psychological form.
Counterfactual Thinking: The Brain’s Built-In Multiverse Engine
Psychology calls it counterfactual thinking.
“If I had stayed…”
“If I had left…”
“If I had taken the job…”
“If I had said no…”
Studies show that imagining alternate pasts activates neural networks similar to those used in planning the future. The brain uses hypothetical simulations to learn, adapt, and predict.
In other words:
When you spiral about alternate outcomes, you’re not broken.
You’re running simulations.
Maybe in Another Life externalizes this mental process. It gives form to the invisible branching we perform internally.
And it does something radical:
It shows that both branches contain beauty and pain.
There is no flawless timeline.
There is no regret-proof existence.
Only different configurations of joy and loss.
Fate vs. Free Will: The Philosophical Cage Match
The book subtly wrestles with a timeless debate:
Is everything predetermined?
Or do we create our own destiny?
Determinism argues that every event follows from prior causes. Free will insists that we shape our future through conscious choice.
Many-Worlds introduces a strange hybrid:
All outcomes occur.
But you experience one.
So do you choose? Yes.
Do other versions of you choose differently? Also yes.
The novel suggests something more practical than metaphysics:
Circumstances shape you.
Choices sculpt you.
Growth happens in either branch — if you engage it.
That’s not fatalism.
That’s responsibility.
Identity Across Timelines: The Constant Self
Here’s where the emotional thesis lands hardest.
Hannah changes partners. Circumstances. External outcomes.
But her core traits persist:
Her insecurities.
Her humor.
Her need to feel chosen.
Her capacity for love.
The multiverse doesn’t erase personality.
It refracts it.
Both Hannahs must confront fear. Both must face truth. Both must mature.
Which dismantles the myth that happiness is hiding exclusively in some alternate decision you failed to make.
Growth is portable.
It travels with you.
The Illusion of the Perfect Timeline
One of the quiet anxieties modern culture feeds us is this:
There is one correct path.
If you choose wrong, you permanently derail yourself.
But quantum frameworks suggest something different.
Outcomes are probabilistic, not moral.
There isn’t a “right” branch of the universe.
There is simply the one you’re in.
And within it, choices continue.
The book’s dual structure exposes a powerful truth:
Every life contains:
Love.
Grief.
Regret.
Redemption.
Unexpected beauty.
Not because fate is cruel.
Because complexity is universal.
Emotional Resilience Through Quantum Thinking
Understanding life through a quantum lens can shift your psychological posture.
Instead of:
“I ruined everything.”
You get:
“I entered a different configuration.”
Instead of:
“There was only one correct answer.”
You get:
“Multiple answers contain meaning.”
This perspective:
Reduces perfection paralysis.
Softens regret.
Encourages value-based decisions.
Normalizes uncertainty.
You don’t need omniscience to live well.
You need courage inside ambiguity.
The Real Question the Book Asks
It’s not:
Which life is better?
It’s:
Who are you becoming within it?
Hannah’s evolution matters more than her romantic endpoint.
That’s where Reid quietly shifts the focus from destiny to development.
Your branch of reality doesn’t determine your worth.
Your engagement with it does.
Practical Takeaways for Your Own Timeline
Let’s bring this out of the cosmos and into your calendar.
When facing a decision:
You cannot predict all outcomes.
Both options likely contain joy and difficulty.
Regret is not proof of failure.
Growth is not exclusive to one path.
You will keep choosing.
The multiverse metaphor doesn’t eliminate fear.
It reframes it.
There is no perfect timeline waiting to be unlocked by flawless foresight.
There is only forward motion.
So… Did You Choose Wrong?
Probably not.
You chose.
And somewhere in theoretical space, another version of you chose differently.
But this version — the one reading this — still has agency.
Still has branches ahead.
Still has infinite micro-decisions unfolding tomorrow.
The wine bar moment never stops.
That’s not terrifying.
It’s liberating.
Because the story doesn’t end at one fork in the road.
It keeps splitting.
And you keep becoming.
