Problems, in the order they appear in reply #147:
1. Given enough time, time will break down. There is no possible amount of time long enough for time to break down. If time has broken down, then by definition one of the endpoints on the duration being specified is undefined, since you know, time broke down and is no longer working.
2. There is no reason to think tat time and space are fundamental objects, let alone unstable ones. In all likelihood, it is subatomic, quantum particles that are the fundamental objects of the universe and our notions of time and space are just abstractions of those interactions, just like our conception of iron is an abstraction for trillions upon trillions of iron atoms all interacting with each other.
3. There is no "the multiversal theory." I mean, for one they're called multiverse theories. Multiversal isn't a word. But more importantly, no realistic theory that could be described as a "multiverse theory" predicts any way to cross between "universes". Hubble volumes are by definition unable to contact each other, different Everett branches only interact in the non-communicative ways predicted by quantum physics and modal realism defines the different universe to be isolated from one-another.
4. Moreover, it's not entirely clear what you even mean by "universe" if two supposedly distinct universes can interact - if they can interact, they're really part of the same universe, abet a universe that is mostly divided into distinct chunks. As such, there is no amount of energy that would propel you from one universe to another - anywhere you can reach by any method using any amount of energy is part of our universe.
5. There's the point Criptfeind brought up as well: Why did you use the phrase "you humans" there? Huh?
So, in short: Get some sleep, man. Things will make way more sense once you do.