Victor J. Stenger (1935–2014)

At first you might think that the title is a misnomer, because the author actually doesn't get to the multiverse (and only briefly to God) until the last couple of chapters of the book. But the first part of the book is a good introduction to physics, the evolution of physics, and modern ideas in physics, explaining how we got to the idea of the multiverse, and why it is not just a concept made up by physicists to try to get around the idea of a Creator. There were a number of interesting show more tidbits in this book, and plenty of new information even for someone who has read quite a bit on this topic. One of the most interesting things was the author's explanation of how we actually can test for the multiverse, something that many lay writers have assumed is impossible (and that, frankly, I thought myself was impossible). Some of the middle of the book can be hard going for people not versed in mathematics, but just reading most of the concepts and scanning the equations can get you through; you don't need a degree in physics if you're willing to trust your author. show less

OK, so I usually hate the phrase "the new atheists", but when written by someone who understands the concept, and that the new atheism is indeed the same atheism we've always had, but a little less closeted, I can take it. This author does a good job of explaining why we need the new, in-your-face atheism in order to prevent religion from running the whole show.

I just saw that I rated this a 4 and I just immediately had to rate it up two years after reading it. At first this book didn't hit me like most books I rate 5, but I find myself thinking about it's arguments and way of arguing time and time again. Really, really solid work.

The failure of this book is on a par with a supernova. Read it and descend into a black hole. Stenger is obviously a knowledgeable physicist with an impressive career. The book spews scientific facts at the speed of light, interspersing the strangest trivia and personal reminiscences in an attempt to make it readable. But the traces of readability are marred by so many missing words, extra words, and other non-spelling errors as to make it seem self-published. That makes one doubt the show more accuracy of his science as well. It ends up being neither an academic scientific publication nor a popular science explanation of his thesis: God is not necessary for physics. I am not shocked by that statement, but I am amazed that someone could put so much effort into this, and presumably his many other books, and yet completely ignore the existence of consciousness in his cosmology or his logic. show less