The book is mistitled, for the question it really pursues is why is there Something rather than Nothing? And in order to finish reading the book, one must find merit in that question. I did not. I tried. I went with him for a while, knowing, of course, that there is no possible answer to the question. But I thought the journey might be worth the while. I thought that along the way, I might learn some interesting stuff, stuff that mattered. I didn't, at least not to me. Holt is certainly a smart guy, and despite that he should steer clear of all attempts at simile, he's an adept writer at making complex stuff understandable. But really, why pursue this question? I mean really, why? The over-examined life isn't worth living, either, especially when it's examining this question.