God Does Not Play Dice: The Fulfillment of Einstein's Quest for Law and Order in Nature

by David A. Shiang

In this revolutionary and provocative work, David A. Shiang claims to offer final answers to many of humankind's most enduring mysteries. He argues that Einstein was right in rejecting the randomness of quantum theory, and he shows that Stephen Hawking (A Brief History of Time) and Brian Greene (The Fabric of the Cosmos) are mistaken in saying that evidence shows nature to be probabilistic. He takes on Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion) and Daniel Dennett (Breaking the Spell), contending that Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is neither scientific nor correct. He also maintains that worry and regret can be overcome, following in the footsteps of T.S. Eliot and other pioneers of the mind.
Odds are high that the logical and elegant solutions Shiang presents to our deepest riddles will cause you to rethink your most fundamental beliefs.
"Very provocative, erudite, and solidly based on intelligent and logical thinking Congratulations on making an excellent contribution to understanding the role of a higher intelligence in organizing the affairs of the universe "
- Pat McGovern, IDG Founder and Chairman, Co-founder of The McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT
"His lucidity and logic are breathtakingly devastating. He is not afraid to defend the mind of God, either.... I cannot overstate the importance of Shiang's work and its deep influence."
- Len Klikunas, Cultural Anthropologist

144 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 1, 2008

Reviews

[Vishal Bawa · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of the first 'random' selections for me, recommended and shared over a conversation about the mass of proton vis-a-vis the Universe. I am surprised to find something so tenable an achievement out of a conversation about the nature of cosmos and incredible energy of the vacuum.

Although a day read, but the author has taken me through a rapid revision of most of my earlier reads. There have been instances when I have related to the thoughts presented by author with Joe Dispenza, Yogananda Paramahansa, Bruce Lipton, Nassim Haramein, Albert Camus, Jane Roberts, Abraham Hicks and few other references too.

God does not play dice is a great work, and has acted as a fitting antithesis for me at times while I am juggling through some of my hard wire thought processes. To quote the author, 'we do not control our past; we do not control our future' is a great thought to just being in the present. As Abraham Hicks would say, we are in a continuous state of becoming., David has presented another perspective to it, he has put references to various authors of science and philosophy to put his point forward.

The book will lead to an era of actualist and determinism, although keeping your excitement intact for the power of human imagination. The author has quoted various schools of thought which includes Newtonian science, philosophy, quantum physics, statistics, mathematics; and it does deliver a point which has lead to firing of unique neuron centres for me. There have been instances where I have found my thoughts getting challenged with the choice of verbatim used for/against hard built human understanding of the nature.

I have given it a star less, since it left me in the lurch for more.

A must read into 'the deterministic'.

[Saarth Jauhari · Rating 4 out of 5]

very compelling. i dont necessarily agree with the author, but he really made me think for weeks.

[Charan · Rating 4 out of 5]

It tries to criticize some fundamental questions of science but in the process leaves a lot of questions unanswered. For example he did not dwell much upon why suffering exists in the nature if it was a grand design. But nonetheless it is worth a read especially by those who believe firmly in the fairness of 'chance'

[Batul · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting read that'll give you tons of ammunition to badger your physicist friends with, Shiang's book is however marred by the same degree of arrogance, contradiction and generalisation he claims characterises the claims of many fellow scientists. His arguments are valid, but just as those he critiques, he does not demonstrate that they are sound. And if like me, you are wary of those who claim to possess the "final" answer, then be sure to read this with a very critical and open mind.

[Keerthana]

I don't want to rate this book. It's a very intriguing book.

[Deepak Singh]

One explanation of the "Free will" mystery.