Paradigms and the Multiverse

Lately, I have put much thought into the idea of paradigms and their role in science. (Granted much of this thought was prodded by my teacher and a most recent assignment) The idea that we must alter or discard our previous belief systems completely in order to move forward in our thought process is intriguing. This is the idea that can lend itself to many arguments supporting possibly illogical and unruly science--if the subject says that he or she has discovered something radical that could change life as we know it, yet it goes against all of our previous knowledge, then how can we know that they are not right in their supposed heresy? How can we identify the geniuses from the madmen? Obviously, we can't. What we can do, however, is test their theories and verify the validity of their science.
An example of this can be seen in the theory of the Multiverse. Saying that we live in a Universe means that we are living separate (Uni, one, singular) from the rest of the Multiverse--if there is one. Therefor, unless we break the laws of logic and say that, while the Universe is inside of the Multiverse, the Multiverse is also inside of the Universe, we can never prove or disprove the Multiverse theory.
Multiple sources have drawn a parallel between the Multiverse and the heliocentric galaxy. On one level, it is compared simply for the sake of the reasoning stated above--we cannot disprove it, but we also cannot prove it. On another, a comparison can be made between the idea that we (planet Earth, or, in this case, our Universe) are the center of it all.
"I think, therefor I am" or the ancient philosophy of Cogito Ergo Sum, does not exclude the rest of the Universe (or the Multiverse). The phrase is not "I think, therefor I am and you are not"--it simply states a knowledge from the first perspective. Now, if we apply that to the theory of the Multiverse and the heliocentric galaxy, then we can see that we do not know everything just because we are the ones experiencing it.
If the Multiverse existed, we would likely not realize it--and neither would any of the other Universes that existed inside of it. However, if we were to validate the Multiverse, then what would happen? Would we suddenly exist in a paradox space? Perhaps not. One theory builds off of the Cogito Ergo Sum philosophy, wherein lies the idea that if we start thinking and manifesting beliefs that there is a Multiverse, then we are in the process of creating one. Personally, I do not believe this--even if the Multiverse existed, it would have predated our theories because in all likelihoods we are the product of another Universe.
Imagine, for a moment, that there is a tree. This tree has a trunk, roots and branches. In this Multiverse theory, we are construed as the trunk of the tree--the place from which everything comes to exist. Our branches are the Universes that we have created, and those Universes' branches, and so on and so forth. But then we look back and we see our roots--something that other trees, in themselves can also thrive on. Then we look farther and see the seed that was planted in the ground to grow this tree and finally we can see that we were not the first. Our Universe is not the original because there is no original. There is always a start and an end to everything, it's true, but there is always a ghost of an image before and after its existance.
I suppose the idea that I'm trying to get at here is that, even if the Multiverse existed, we would not be the center of it, just like we are not the center of our solar system--just like the Earth does not rotate around a single person on its surface.

If you are interested in these ideas, please watch this video, as it is quite intriguing.