It's generally a good idea to understand ideas before expounding on them, and it's essential to understand ideas before making huge leaps of imagination.

Alan Guth's eternal inflation model is elegant because it explains a number of features in our universe such as the relative homogeneity of the CMB and the lack of magnetic monopoles. At present it's the favored cosmological model to explain how the so-called big bang was triggered.

But nothing in Guth's model suggests parallel universes in the sense of universes in which things appear as they do in our universe. The notion that if you give an infinite number of monkeys an infinite amount of time then you must inevitably get the entire works of Shakespeare is thermodynamically illiterate - and therefore the idea that there are analogs of each of us in some parallel universe is also thermodynamically illiterate. This is also, by the way, why the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of the double-slit experiment is not generally accepted among real physicists.

On a more trivial note, our universe is not 96 billion lightyears in diameter. It appears to be much larger - though how large, and what the ultimate topological conformation may be, is impossible to say at this time. What is true is that our observable universe has a diameter of 93.016 lightyears. It does not bode well for an article purporting to discuss important cosmological concepts that it should begin with such a simple mistake as to ascribe the wrong value to the (observable) size of the universe in which we live.