What do you think?
Rate this book
The Disordered Cosmos: A Journey into Dark Matter, Spacetime, and Dreams Deferred
Goodreads Choice Award
Nominee for Best Nonfiction (2021)From a star theoretical physicist, a journey into the world of particle physics and the cosmos—and a call for a more liberatory practice of science.
In The Disordered Cosmos , Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein shares her love for physics, from the Standard Model of Particle Physics and what lies beyond it, to the physics of melanin in skin, to the latest theories of dark matter—along with a perspective informed by history, politics, and the wisdom of Star Trek .
One of the leading physicists of her generation, Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is also one of fewer than one hundred Black American women to earn a PhD from a department of physics. Her vision of the cosmos is vibrant, buoyantly nontraditional, and grounded in Black and queer feminist lineages.
Dr. Prescod-Weinstein urges us to recognize how science, like most fields, is rife with racism, misogyny, and other forms of oppression. She lays out a bold new approach to science and society, beginning with the belief that we all have a fundamental right to know and love the night sky. The Disordered Cosmos dreams into existence a world that allows everyone to experience and understand the wonders of the universe.
In The Disordered Cosmos , Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein shares her love for physics, from the Standard Model of Particle Physics and what lies beyond it, to the physics of melanin in skin, to the latest theories of dark matter—along with a perspective informed by history, politics, and the wisdom of Star Trek .
One of the leading physicists of her generation, Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is also one of fewer than one hundred Black American women to earn a PhD from a department of physics. Her vision of the cosmos is vibrant, buoyantly nontraditional, and grounded in Black and queer feminist lineages.
Dr. Prescod-Weinstein urges us to recognize how science, like most fields, is rife with racism, misogyny, and other forms of oppression. She lays out a bold new approach to science and society, beginning with the belief that we all have a fundamental right to know and love the night sky. The Disordered Cosmos dreams into existence a world that allows everyone to experience and understand the wonders of the universe.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published March 9, 2021
About the author
Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
2 books157 followersChanda Prescod-Weinstein is an American and Barbadian theoretical cosmologist, and is both an Assistant Professor of Physics and Astronomy and a Core Faculty Member in Women's and Gender Studies at the University of New Hampshire.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 682 reviews
January 26, 2022
The Physics of Skin
The community of scientists reflects the character of the larger community of which it is part. That is to say, it is racist, misogynistic, self-deluding, and agonisingly slow to change to the same extent as the larger society. Prescod-Weinstein puts the situation bluntly: “The tradition of racism among white scientists is perhaps not surprising when we recognize that science and society co-construct one another.”
The scientific community rejects this characterisation. Of course it does. In fact it does so with considerable skill and credibility since it’s members are among the best educated, most articulate, and most respected elite of society. They are, in a word, privileged. They are also overwhelmingly male and almost exclusively white.
Naturally most of us attribute our successes to intelligence, hard work, and persistent dedication. I have no doubt that scientists feel the same way. Scientists also consider themselves and their work as ‘objective.’ This should mean that any presumptions they hold about their work are subject to change in light of further evidence. But historically such openness to evidence has never been the case. The Old Guard typically fights desperately to maintain their presumptions by dismissing such evidence as spurious, wrong, or fake.
And so it is with scientific social mores. As the author says, “Articulating scientific questions is social.” So is articulating who is admitted to the community, the judgments about whose work is credible, and even the language accepted as ‘ours’ within the community. That these social norms have resulted in prejudicial exclusion of women, people of colour, and others who don’t conform with the dominantly white male composition of the community is undeniable. So scientists largely ignore the issue. “Science thus became a process in which bias was consecrated by scientists. Racism was axiomatic, rather than a belief requiring skeptical investigation.”
Hence the author’s main point: “Studying the physical world requires confronting the social world.” The sociology of science is corrupt. It is corrupt not only because it is irrationally prejudiced about race and gender, but also because it contributes to the creation of bad science. Gottfried Leibniz was perhaps the first philosopher who, in the 17th century, recognised that what we call reality is a composite of individual viewpoints. To the extent that science is about approaching reality, it inhibits itself when it is exclusionary - no matter how unintentionally on the part of any individual scientist.
Prescod-Weinstein uses an unusual technique. Her book is a sort of intellectual memoir of her life as a cosmologist and particle physicist, and a meditation on the successful Black professional woman in the post-colonial white man’s world. This is a world not just dominated by race and gender but also one in which scientific rationality has been used consistently to justify it own prejudices: “how things worked had to be consistent with justifying abominable behavior… Science thus became a process in which bias was consecrated by scientists. Racism was axiomatic, rather than a belief requiring skeptical investigation.”
Many will object to such a blatant subjective assessment of the scientific community. Tough. It’s time to face up to the extent and persistence of the horrors of racism in the most important institutions of our society. This book may be a model for pushing that process forward.
The community of scientists reflects the character of the larger community of which it is part. That is to say, it is racist, misogynistic, self-deluding, and agonisingly slow to change to the same extent as the larger society. Prescod-Weinstein puts the situation bluntly: “The tradition of racism among white scientists is perhaps not surprising when we recognize that science and society co-construct one another.”
The scientific community rejects this characterisation. Of course it does. In fact it does so with considerable skill and credibility since it’s members are among the best educated, most articulate, and most respected elite of society. They are, in a word, privileged. They are also overwhelmingly male and almost exclusively white.
Naturally most of us attribute our successes to intelligence, hard work, and persistent dedication. I have no doubt that scientists feel the same way. Scientists also consider themselves and their work as ‘objective.’ This should mean that any presumptions they hold about their work are subject to change in light of further evidence. But historically such openness to evidence has never been the case. The Old Guard typically fights desperately to maintain their presumptions by dismissing such evidence as spurious, wrong, or fake.
And so it is with scientific social mores. As the author says, “Articulating scientific questions is social.” So is articulating who is admitted to the community, the judgments about whose work is credible, and even the language accepted as ‘ours’ within the community. That these social norms have resulted in prejudicial exclusion of women, people of colour, and others who don’t conform with the dominantly white male composition of the community is undeniable. So scientists largely ignore the issue. “Science thus became a process in which bias was consecrated by scientists. Racism was axiomatic, rather than a belief requiring skeptical investigation.”
Hence the author’s main point: “Studying the physical world requires confronting the social world.” The sociology of science is corrupt. It is corrupt not only because it is irrationally prejudiced about race and gender, but also because it contributes to the creation of bad science. Gottfried Leibniz was perhaps the first philosopher who, in the 17th century, recognised that what we call reality is a composite of individual viewpoints. To the extent that science is about approaching reality, it inhibits itself when it is exclusionary - no matter how unintentionally on the part of any individual scientist.
Prescod-Weinstein uses an unusual technique. Her book is a sort of intellectual memoir of her life as a cosmologist and particle physicist, and a meditation on the successful Black professional woman in the post-colonial white man’s world. This is a world not just dominated by race and gender but also one in which scientific rationality has been used consistently to justify it own prejudices: “how things worked had to be consistent with justifying abominable behavior… Science thus became a process in which bias was consecrated by scientists. Racism was axiomatic, rather than a belief requiring skeptical investigation.”
Many will object to such a blatant subjective assessment of the scientific community. Tough. It’s time to face up to the extent and persistence of the horrors of racism in the most important institutions of our society. This book may be a model for pushing that process forward.
February 7, 2021
So I’m terrible at math and science. Absolutely dreadful. This book was really challenging for the first 4 chapters. I didn’t understand much. Then it got REALLY good. The shift from deep physics to the issues and responsibilities of Science was super interesting. I love the ways Prescod-Weinstein thinks about activism, equality, and folks who have been marginalized. I didn’t always get it when it came to science but I got it when it came to the humanity in science.
August 21, 2021
*** Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is my new favourite physicist! ***
I went into this book thinking it was "just" a book on astrophysics. The title and the kick-ass gorgeous cover were enough for me to want to read it and I didn't bother to read the blurb. Often when I judge a book by its cover in this way, I end up not liking the book.
This one? I'm blown away! Prescod-Weinstein writes about many things, not only physics. She talks about her experience as a non-binary, Jewish Black woman in the field of physics where racism and sexism are prevalent. She shows how much of what we think we know about scientific discoveries and how we think about our place in the cosmos is based upon a white supremacist patriarchal framework -- and how scientific discoveries and research are used to uphold that framework.
Dr Prescod-Weinstein goes on to show how we can do things differently and create a world where all humans are valued, and a world in which the field of science is accessible to all.
Unfortunately, my brain is still healing and my writing skills aren't fully "back" -- there's so much more I could and would love to say about this book but this short review will have to suffice.
Even if physics isn't your "thing", there's so much more to this book. The author goes deeply into physics in just the first few chapters and then ventures into other areas. Prescod-Weinstein writes with passion and clarity and her love for science and for humanity shines. She is brilliant, the book is awesome, and I highly recommend it.
I went into this book thinking it was "just" a book on astrophysics. The title and the kick-ass gorgeous cover were enough for me to want to read it and I didn't bother to read the blurb. Often when I judge a book by its cover in this way, I end up not liking the book.
This one? I'm blown away! Prescod-Weinstein writes about many things, not only physics. She talks about her experience as a non-binary, Jewish Black woman in the field of physics where racism and sexism are prevalent. She shows how much of what we think we know about scientific discoveries and how we think about our place in the cosmos is based upon a white supremacist patriarchal framework -- and how scientific discoveries and research are used to uphold that framework.
Dr Prescod-Weinstein goes on to show how we can do things differently and create a world where all humans are valued, and a world in which the field of science is accessible to all.
Unfortunately, my brain is still healing and my writing skills aren't fully "back" -- there's so much more I could and would love to say about this book but this short review will have to suffice.
Even if physics isn't your "thing", there's so much more to this book. The author goes deeply into physics in just the first few chapters and then ventures into other areas. Prescod-Weinstein writes with passion and clarity and her love for science and for humanity shines. She is brilliant, the book is awesome, and I highly recommend it.
March 19, 2021
It really disappoints me that this book is just okay. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein is a skilled writer and some of her ideas about how racism has limited scientific thought are illuminating. Unfortunately, I feel that Disordered Cosmos needed a clearer focus and better editors to help it reach its full potential.
Whether or not this is true, it felt like no editor had sat Prescod-Weinstein down and made her think critically about who her audience is. This book was published by a commercial publisher—there is therefore an assumption that the book is meant for general audiences. However, the quantum mechanics discussed in the first quarter of the book aren’t introduced appropriately for a general audience. I’ve taken university-level chemistry courses that have discussed quantum mechanics, and even with that background I couldn’t have been expected to keep up with the barrage of undefined, specialized scientific terminology.
It wasn’t science communication. From the point-of-view of a writer and a teacher, it lacked the basic rules for talking about difficult topics: Break down complex ideas into simple components, define new terminology, introduce one new element of information at a time, and build simpler concepts on top of each other to lead to an understanding of more complex ideas. Literally none of these techniques were followed, and the result was incomprehensible. I see other reviewers excusing this by blaming themselves for being bad at STEM, and that makes me sad, because that’s not how science communication should make anyone feel.
It also impacted the discussion about discrimination. For example, I really wanted to fully grasp her point about race and quantum chromodynamics, which I think is one of the most important points in the book. But quantum chromodynamics wasn’t explained well enough for me to be able to explain her point coherently to other people, which is really disappointing.
While reading I thought: Maybe this book is meant for grad students only. In which case—that kind of stinks, because she talks so much about the inaccessibility of science that the deliberate inaccessibility of her own book seems hypocritical. But as I continued reading, the text didn’t seem targeted toward the especially well-educated. Confusingly, she takes the time to define what an acronym is (“a set of initials that spells out a word,” she writes), even while earlier she wrote about gravitons, fermions, the Pauli exclusion principle, etc., without defining them. Why was it assumed I already understood the Standard Model of quantum physics but wouldn’t know what an acronym was? Later, she explains that GREs are “the graduate school equivalent of the SAT,” which cemented that this book wasn’t written only for the already-educated. Why the total garbled mess of inaccessible science, then?
After that first quarter of the book comes a less quantum-intensive discussion of discrimination in STEM. This section felt cluttered. It often had too much breadth and not enough depth. It’s powerful, for example, for a prominent physicist to criticize Elon Musk and his satellites. But she doesn’t tell us anything about this subject that we couldn’t find in a news article.
At one point she discusses the limits of Cartesian coordinates and wonders how these rigid planes may have stifled Western scientific thought. Such a tantalizing hypothesis! She brings up the Palikur people of the Amazon, who have a “curvilinear geometric system.” She never explains what this system is, though. It’s clear she doesn’t actually know much about it, because despite everything she is relentlessly U.S.-centric.
I was annoyed by the constant U.S.-centrism, a quality I have found most prevalent in people who spend a lot of time of Twitter, which seems to suck users into an americana soapbox. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein is trapped in such a soap box, and the prose frequently collapses into flashy tweetable zingers and repetitive, furious rants.
At the same time, she brings up very important points. Her writing was best when it focused on the narrowly personal or the absolutely unique (The physics of melanin???? Amazing???? The idea that we consider “dark matter” to be sinister because of the word dark was another fascinating discussion.).
Content warning for assault mention:
The effects of inequality are so real, so tangible, and yet so difficult to talk about. I’m so grateful she wrote that chapter.
Her discussion about inequality in the Ivy Leagues was also important: Not only did she highlight how shockingly few Black women there are in physics, but she underlined the experience of poor people in academia in ways I related to fiercely but haven’t seen discussed before. For example, why do rich universities deprive their poorest students of the level of financial aid that would allow them to dedicate all their time to studying, not to working parttime jobs? As an undergrad, Dr. Prescod-Weinstein was working while her peers were studying. I worked 30-40 hours a week during most of my undergrad years, in addition to taking fulltime classes. I lived 90 minutes from campus because I couldn’t afford rent closer. This combination meant I couldn’t take courses at certain hours and on certain days, which effectively meant I couldn’t take intensive language courses or science labs. Entire university departments were closed to me because I was poor.
And I blamed myself for being poor; it felt natural to accept less than what others got. I never once thought about my university’s role in decreasing the quality of my life in comparison to my wealthier peers. I have a lot more to think about on this subject because of Dr. Prescod-Weinstein. She sums up her experience heartbreakingly well: Rather than foster my aspirations to make a significant contribution to particle physics and cosmology, Harvard had taught me to see myself as a working-class kid from an overpopulated, under-resourced school district who could never win at an upper- (middle-) class man’s game.
What does it mean to be a Black woman physicist in America? I was surprised by the degree to which that question applied to me, a white person who majored in East Asian Studies. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein was attracted to science as a girl because she thought it was an escape into an objective world of cosmological wonders, separate from human cruelty. She thought she could be apolitical.
I majored in East Asian Studies. It was not until my senior year that I even understood how the department of “East Asian Studies” had come to be. I too had thought I was steered toward my academic discipline because of my own passions and intellectual curiosity. In reality, I too was subconsciously guided toward my major because of war and U.S. foreign policy. Both East Asian Studies and cosmology are linked to the Cold War. As Prescod-Weinstein writes, I thought I was working to change the world, when instead I had consumed incredibly effective intellectual propaganda.
Overall, when Dr. Prescod-Weinstein was writing about unique insights in social issues and physics, the ideas were fresh and compelling. Much of the time, though, the tone is inconsistent and seemed catered toward avid Twitter scrollers.
A lot of people are going to love this book. I didn’t love it, but it definitely gave me a lot to think about. I promise to research quantum chromodynamics so that I can explain to others why it kind of sucks.
Whether or not this is true, it felt like no editor had sat Prescod-Weinstein down and made her think critically about who her audience is. This book was published by a commercial publisher—there is therefore an assumption that the book is meant for general audiences. However, the quantum mechanics discussed in the first quarter of the book aren’t introduced appropriately for a general audience. I’ve taken university-level chemistry courses that have discussed quantum mechanics, and even with that background I couldn’t have been expected to keep up with the barrage of undefined, specialized scientific terminology.
It wasn’t science communication. From the point-of-view of a writer and a teacher, it lacked the basic rules for talking about difficult topics: Break down complex ideas into simple components, define new terminology, introduce one new element of information at a time, and build simpler concepts on top of each other to lead to an understanding of more complex ideas. Literally none of these techniques were followed, and the result was incomprehensible. I see other reviewers excusing this by blaming themselves for being bad at STEM, and that makes me sad, because that’s not how science communication should make anyone feel.
It also impacted the discussion about discrimination. For example, I really wanted to fully grasp her point about race and quantum chromodynamics, which I think is one of the most important points in the book. But quantum chromodynamics wasn’t explained well enough for me to be able to explain her point coherently to other people, which is really disappointing.
While reading I thought: Maybe this book is meant for grad students only. In which case—that kind of stinks, because she talks so much about the inaccessibility of science that the deliberate inaccessibility of her own book seems hypocritical. But as I continued reading, the text didn’t seem targeted toward the especially well-educated. Confusingly, she takes the time to define what an acronym is (“a set of initials that spells out a word,” she writes), even while earlier she wrote about gravitons, fermions, the Pauli exclusion principle, etc., without defining them. Why was it assumed I already understood the Standard Model of quantum physics but wouldn’t know what an acronym was? Later, she explains that GREs are “the graduate school equivalent of the SAT,” which cemented that this book wasn’t written only for the already-educated. Why the total garbled mess of inaccessible science, then?
After that first quarter of the book comes a less quantum-intensive discussion of discrimination in STEM. This section felt cluttered. It often had too much breadth and not enough depth. It’s powerful, for example, for a prominent physicist to criticize Elon Musk and his satellites. But she doesn’t tell us anything about this subject that we couldn’t find in a news article.
At one point she discusses the limits of Cartesian coordinates and wonders how these rigid planes may have stifled Western scientific thought. Such a tantalizing hypothesis! She brings up the Palikur people of the Amazon, who have a “curvilinear geometric system.” She never explains what this system is, though. It’s clear she doesn’t actually know much about it, because despite everything she is relentlessly U.S.-centric.
I was annoyed by the constant U.S.-centrism, a quality I have found most prevalent in people who spend a lot of time of Twitter, which seems to suck users into an americana soapbox. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein is trapped in such a soap box, and the prose frequently collapses into flashy tweetable zingers and repetitive, furious rants.
At the same time, she brings up very important points. Her writing was best when it focused on the narrowly personal or the absolutely unique (The physics of melanin???? Amazing???? The idea that we consider “dark matter” to be sinister because of the word dark was another fascinating discussion.).
Content warning for assault mention:
The effects of inequality are so real, so tangible, and yet so difficult to talk about. I’m so grateful she wrote that chapter.
Her discussion about inequality in the Ivy Leagues was also important: Not only did she highlight how shockingly few Black women there are in physics, but she underlined the experience of poor people in academia in ways I related to fiercely but haven’t seen discussed before. For example, why do rich universities deprive their poorest students of the level of financial aid that would allow them to dedicate all their time to studying, not to working parttime jobs? As an undergrad, Dr. Prescod-Weinstein was working while her peers were studying. I worked 30-40 hours a week during most of my undergrad years, in addition to taking fulltime classes. I lived 90 minutes from campus because I couldn’t afford rent closer. This combination meant I couldn’t take courses at certain hours and on certain days, which effectively meant I couldn’t take intensive language courses or science labs. Entire university departments were closed to me because I was poor.
And I blamed myself for being poor; it felt natural to accept less than what others got. I never once thought about my university’s role in decreasing the quality of my life in comparison to my wealthier peers. I have a lot more to think about on this subject because of Dr. Prescod-Weinstein. She sums up her experience heartbreakingly well: Rather than foster my aspirations to make a significant contribution to particle physics and cosmology, Harvard had taught me to see myself as a working-class kid from an overpopulated, under-resourced school district who could never win at an upper- (middle-) class man’s game.
What does it mean to be a Black woman physicist in America? I was surprised by the degree to which that question applied to me, a white person who majored in East Asian Studies. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein was attracted to science as a girl because she thought it was an escape into an objective world of cosmological wonders, separate from human cruelty. She thought she could be apolitical.
I majored in East Asian Studies. It was not until my senior year that I even understood how the department of “East Asian Studies” had come to be. I too had thought I was steered toward my academic discipline because of my own passions and intellectual curiosity. In reality, I too was subconsciously guided toward my major because of war and U.S. foreign policy. Both East Asian Studies and cosmology are linked to the Cold War. As Prescod-Weinstein writes, I thought I was working to change the world, when instead I had consumed incredibly effective intellectual propaganda.
Overall, when Dr. Prescod-Weinstein was writing about unique insights in social issues and physics, the ideas were fresh and compelling. Much of the time, though, the tone is inconsistent and seemed catered toward avid Twitter scrollers.
A lot of people are going to love this book. I didn’t love it, but it definitely gave me a lot to think about. I promise to research quantum chromodynamics so that I can explain to others why it kind of sucks.
April 22, 2021
The author’s ideological beliefs that the world is run by white supremist, ableist, patriarchal enablers and totalitarian colonialist, and that the neo-liberals and moderate Democrats are to blame for not seeing the coming of that Fascist Trump to the White House is the story that the author is telling as a black feminist physicist. They tell their story with no nuance, no shades of gray, and as binary as any archetype could be. (book hint: read Hannah Arendt’s book The Origins of Totalitarianism for why they should not have used the word totalitarian the way they did or at least should have provided an amplification).
There was no real physics story that I hadn’t already read elsewhere within this book. I always plead with authors: when writing a book tell me something I don’t already know. As for the grievances laid out by the author against anyone who was part of the tyranny within their ideological beliefs, they used all of the big sounding words appropriately, but that alone doesn’t make for a convincing argument.
I had to look up ableist, I didn’t know what it meant. The world sucks. I get defined by my disabilities. I don’t even disagree with the author’s ideological beliefs when I apply context, contrast and relations, but I know that the world sucks and I have to live within the world we are thrown into, and I know that there are shades with nuances and the world is more of a spectrum than it is binary, and that Aristotelian categories (archetypes) are human made and that context, contrast, and relations matter as much as rigorously held ideological beliefs, otherwise we’d all be members of a religious cult, or a cult of grievances as this author wants, or worse yet we’d be a member of a mainstream evangelical religion because that’s what we become if we forget the shades with nuances and that the world is best perceived as a spectrum rather than binary as the author seems to forget. When one has certainty, nothing remains to be discovered. The world we are thrown into is always elusive to me and I don’t have the certainty as the author does that the world is run by white supremist, ableists, patriarchal enablers and totalitarian colonialist as the author affirmatively states.
We are thrown into the world that we are born into. Unfortunately, I didn’t have a chance to choose my world. I did want to understand the author’s experiences but unfortunately, they said that story remotely almost as if they were a spectator within their own life, and they were way more interested in describing their world view of their narrow ideological beliefs which they took as certainty since it was truth within their own mind, but not the truth within my mind.
This book at best reads as a series of blog posts that have been tied together and only coheres for those who are deep into the cult that they expound. For me, this book was a sludge to get through because the grievances never ended and the author only remotely talked about their experiences, but rather, dwelled on their rigorously held ideological beliefs at the expense of what I thought would have been uniquely held experiences for which I would have been more interested in.
There was no real physics story that I hadn’t already read elsewhere within this book. I always plead with authors: when writing a book tell me something I don’t already know. As for the grievances laid out by the author against anyone who was part of the tyranny within their ideological beliefs, they used all of the big sounding words appropriately, but that alone doesn’t make for a convincing argument.
I had to look up ableist, I didn’t know what it meant. The world sucks. I get defined by my disabilities. I don’t even disagree with the author’s ideological beliefs when I apply context, contrast and relations, but I know that the world sucks and I have to live within the world we are thrown into, and I know that there are shades with nuances and the world is more of a spectrum than it is binary, and that Aristotelian categories (archetypes) are human made and that context, contrast, and relations matter as much as rigorously held ideological beliefs, otherwise we’d all be members of a religious cult, or a cult of grievances as this author wants, or worse yet we’d be a member of a mainstream evangelical religion because that’s what we become if we forget the shades with nuances and that the world is best perceived as a spectrum rather than binary as the author seems to forget. When one has certainty, nothing remains to be discovered. The world we are thrown into is always elusive to me and I don’t have the certainty as the author does that the world is run by white supremist, ableists, patriarchal enablers and totalitarian colonialist as the author affirmatively states.
We are thrown into the world that we are born into. Unfortunately, I didn’t have a chance to choose my world. I did want to understand the author’s experiences but unfortunately, they said that story remotely almost as if they were a spectator within their own life, and they were way more interested in describing their world view of their narrow ideological beliefs which they took as certainty since it was truth within their own mind, but not the truth within my mind.
This book at best reads as a series of blog posts that have been tied together and only coheres for those who are deep into the cult that they expound. For me, this book was a sludge to get through because the grievances never ended and the author only remotely talked about their experiences, but rather, dwelled on their rigorously held ideological beliefs at the expense of what I thought would have been uniquely held experiences for which I would have been more interested in.
March 13, 2024
WTAF
"Black Feminist Physics at the End of the World"
Image: President Biden's 2023 budget includes $7.5 billion to "land the first woman and person of color on the moon"
May 31, 2021
This book had nothing to do with astronomy or astrophysics, or even science. This was one persons quest to be a victim. Everything in life that happens is because she is a victim. She supports rapists, is a racist, lacks mastery in her chosen field of study, promotes lies to remove the competition, lacks basic research skills, is unable to use Google, and lacks professionalism. All of which leave her to be the victim.
Ways she made herself to be the victim:
1. Alleges she was raped and refuses to do anything about it. All while labeling someone else in her field as a rapist although a simple Google search revealed that they were CLEARED before this book was written. I bet she knows that but if perpetuating that lie means advancement for her then she will keep that lie going. Also, she knew/knows her alleged rapist but refuses to notify anyone about it. Even went so far as to use this book to send reassurances that she will never divulge his identity. Every person that has been or will be harmed when you had the chance to stop it is partially her fault for covering up his crime. She claims that rape is a form of exerting power over another, yet refuses to take that power away. All so she can keep the label of "Victim."
2. Alleges she is not free to be herself while at work. She tried to speak in the language she was comfortable with and was told to use the commonly accepted method of communicating. Everyone else would call this professionalism, she claimed racism. You call yourself a scientist but cannot figure out the need for continuity among your peers?
3. Alleges all police shoot and kill all black people. She blatantly stated that "Those of us with more eumelanin in our skin are more likely to die at the hands of police." Blatant lie. I did notice that she opted to not mention how many blacks were killed by other blacks. Or how many committed suicide. Numerous times she mentioned that police only kill blacks. So either she has never crossed paths with police or that repeated statement is crap.
4. Speaks of unpaid work. For example, she wants the women who stay home and raise children to be given recognition to the scientific discoveries of their spouse. She also wants to give credit to the janitorial and food service staff who make life easier. No mention of giving credit to the taxpayers, private people/businesses, and the founders of colleges/universities that provide funding.
Also, she admits to accepting tasks that she doesn't get paid for and is not required, asked, or expected to do. If she were to stop doing that job, nothing bad would happen to her. But she does it anyway. She does all this because she wants to bet the victim as much as possible. She claims her victimness is the reason she helps others. I sense it is because she needs to be seen as a victim. All the while she claims "...I can't be responsible for every problem." Then stop seeking other problems.
5. Claims that her ancestors were kidnapped by Europeans and Americans. False. Slaves were captured by other black people and sold to the slave ships. She also kept making the claim that her ancestors were raped. She has no proof but it helps he to stay a victim so she is going to keep saying it.
6. Wants to speak about the lack of diversity in her chosen field, but never thought to investigate how many HBCU's offer courses in astronomy and physics. Also, which ones have PhD. programs in Astronomy and Physics. Claims she wants parity in a field but claims that black people tell her that science isn't for them. She also wants diversity even if unqualified people are given positions that they cannot handle. Apparently having the ignorant teach the ignorant will propel us educationally.
7. Her choice for elected official didn't win because everyone is a racist. Even other blacks that voted against her.
8. She even has built in excuses to maintain her victimhood. If you dislike her book, you are racist, sexist, homophobic, anit-Semetic...
If she gets passed up for tenure it isn't because she is admittedly spending time on other things than what she is getting paid for. It is because she is a woman in a man's field, or because she is black, or because she is agendered. Everything except her own shortcomings.
9. What I did find interesting was her unwillingness to recognize when she is being used as a token. She noted that she won the 2021 Edward A. Bouchet award is because she fir the profile, black woman. That is the thing to do to hide your past discrepancies. Try to find one person to show atonement. Yet, she took the award and brags about being the recipient. So much for your claim of "learning to think better."
Ways she made herself to be the victim:
1. Alleges she was raped and refuses to do anything about it. All while labeling someone else in her field as a rapist although a simple Google search revealed that they were CLEARED before this book was written. I bet she knows that but if perpetuating that lie means advancement for her then she will keep that lie going. Also, she knew/knows her alleged rapist but refuses to notify anyone about it. Even went so far as to use this book to send reassurances that she will never divulge his identity. Every person that has been or will be harmed when you had the chance to stop it is partially her fault for covering up his crime. She claims that rape is a form of exerting power over another, yet refuses to take that power away. All so she can keep the label of "Victim."
2. Alleges she is not free to be herself while at work. She tried to speak in the language she was comfortable with and was told to use the commonly accepted method of communicating. Everyone else would call this professionalism, she claimed racism. You call yourself a scientist but cannot figure out the need for continuity among your peers?
3. Alleges all police shoot and kill all black people. She blatantly stated that "Those of us with more eumelanin in our skin are more likely to die at the hands of police." Blatant lie. I did notice that she opted to not mention how many blacks were killed by other blacks. Or how many committed suicide. Numerous times she mentioned that police only kill blacks. So either she has never crossed paths with police or that repeated statement is crap.
4. Speaks of unpaid work. For example, she wants the women who stay home and raise children to be given recognition to the scientific discoveries of their spouse. She also wants to give credit to the janitorial and food service staff who make life easier. No mention of giving credit to the taxpayers, private people/businesses, and the founders of colleges/universities that provide funding.
Also, she admits to accepting tasks that she doesn't get paid for and is not required, asked, or expected to do. If she were to stop doing that job, nothing bad would happen to her. But she does it anyway. She does all this because she wants to bet the victim as much as possible. She claims her victimness is the reason she helps others. I sense it is because she needs to be seen as a victim. All the while she claims "...I can't be responsible for every problem." Then stop seeking other problems.
5. Claims that her ancestors were kidnapped by Europeans and Americans. False. Slaves were captured by other black people and sold to the slave ships. She also kept making the claim that her ancestors were raped. She has no proof but it helps he to stay a victim so she is going to keep saying it.
6. Wants to speak about the lack of diversity in her chosen field, but never thought to investigate how many HBCU's offer courses in astronomy and physics. Also, which ones have PhD. programs in Astronomy and Physics. Claims she wants parity in a field but claims that black people tell her that science isn't for them. She also wants diversity even if unqualified people are given positions that they cannot handle. Apparently having the ignorant teach the ignorant will propel us educationally.
7. Her choice for elected official didn't win because everyone is a racist. Even other blacks that voted against her.
8. She even has built in excuses to maintain her victimhood. If you dislike her book, you are racist, sexist, homophobic, anit-Semetic...
If she gets passed up for tenure it isn't because she is admittedly spending time on other things than what she is getting paid for. It is because she is a woman in a man's field, or because she is black, or because she is agendered. Everything except her own shortcomings.
9. What I did find interesting was her unwillingness to recognize when she is being used as a token. She noted that she won the 2021 Edward A. Bouchet award is because she fir the profile, black woman. That is the thing to do to hide your past discrepancies. Try to find one person to show atonement. Yet, she took the award and brags about being the recipient. So much for your claim of "learning to think better."
December 26, 2021
AVOID. You might think this book is about outer space, but you would be wrong. It’s entirely political, which I can appreciate in books, but not when it’s approached like this.
Summary: Woe is me, whining, whining, whining. Blaming. Complaining. Whining. Pushing often ridiculous ideologies. Blaming. Probably making things up. Cherry picking. Did I say WOE IS ME?
Author is very upset because the phrase “dark matter” is racist and offensive. Using colors (like blue) to describe things in science is racist and offensive. Everything is racist and offensive — that is the point of this book.
Yes, inclusion is important! No, you are not being discriminated against because random abstract concepts from the 1960’s got named by the people who discovered them. Author needs to get over themselves, because frankly, this was ridiculous to listen to.
I am 47% through the book and stopping here because it’s literally agonizing for me to experience any longer. I do not want to pick it back up, ever. It was like working retail again. I am genuinely shocked at how high the ratings are for this, but I see you 1-star reviews, I see you. And I stand with you.
This entire book is essentially about how the author is “silenced” and “oppressed” and a “victim.” I have read phenomenal, eye-opening books about racism, and this was not one of them, okay? This should have been an angry blog series for a very select group of other angry people, not a professional book marketed as science.
Summary: Woe is me, whining, whining, whining. Blaming. Complaining. Whining. Pushing often ridiculous ideologies. Blaming. Probably making things up. Cherry picking. Did I say WOE IS ME?
Author is very upset because the phrase “dark matter” is racist and offensive. Using colors (like blue) to describe things in science is racist and offensive. Everything is racist and offensive — that is the point of this book.
Yes, inclusion is important! No, you are not being discriminated against because random abstract concepts from the 1960’s got named by the people who discovered them. Author needs to get over themselves, because frankly, this was ridiculous to listen to.
I am 47% through the book and stopping here because it’s literally agonizing for me to experience any longer. I do not want to pick it back up, ever. It was like working retail again. I am genuinely shocked at how high the ratings are for this, but I see you 1-star reviews, I see you. And I stand with you.
This entire book is essentially about how the author is “silenced” and “oppressed” and a “victim.” I have read phenomenal, eye-opening books about racism, and this was not one of them, okay? This should have been an angry blog series for a very select group of other angry people, not a professional book marketed as science.
February 21, 2022
This is an excellent piece of nonfiction from the first Black woman in cosmology. It blends science writing, memoir, and intersectional feminist thought in a way that is both rigorous and accessible to a broad range of readers. Her passion for studying the stars and the history of the universe is clear, but the path to that career has been far from easy. From a working class family in Los Angeles to Harvard, dealing with racism, misogyny, and sexual assault...this book covers the unsavory side of academic science.
But it is also a thoughtful discussion of the history of science- the erasure of women and people of color who contributed to the field, as well as how indigenous versions of science have not been taken seriously because they aren't steeped in the Western academy. She also calls on scientists to consider their own social responsibilities- to the indigenous people affected by telescopes being built on their land, to the people in caretaking roles that make their work possible.
And she talks a bit about how she is situated at the intersection of identities: a Black, agender, queer, Jewish, disabled woman. And how all of those things impact her work as a scientist and how she exists in the world. It's a beautifully written book that concisely covers a breadth of serious issues, while also educating the reader on some of the basics of her own field. Definitely worth a read.
But it is also a thoughtful discussion of the history of science- the erasure of women and people of color who contributed to the field, as well as how indigenous versions of science have not been taken seriously because they aren't steeped in the Western academy. She also calls on scientists to consider their own social responsibilities- to the indigenous people affected by telescopes being built on their land, to the people in caretaking roles that make their work possible.
And she talks a bit about how she is situated at the intersection of identities: a Black, agender, queer, Jewish, disabled woman. And how all of those things impact her work as a scientist and how she exists in the world. It's a beautifully written book that concisely covers a breadth of serious issues, while also educating the reader on some of the basics of her own field. Definitely worth a read.
February 11, 2021
This book is largely a session of the author's fascinating musings on everything from science to sociology and race in America. Despite the heavy physics terminology in the first few chapters, it was so well written that I could easily follow most of it. Math is not something that translates easily for me but I'm fascinated by string theory, quantum physics and spacetime. I loved everything about this book. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein refers to herself as a "griot of the universe— a storyteller" and she certainly is. This book will light the fire of inspiration in anyone who reads it. The tradition of racism among scientists is a topic not typically broached but an important discussion to have. Thank you so much for allowing me to review this.
Read
April 15, 2023I don't give non-fiction works star ratings
Content warning: Racism, SA
Truly an amazing book. Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, a black, Jewish, American, queer, agender (she/her pronouns) Astrophysicist explores the intersectionality of her life's work and her identity.
Science historically has been a field populated by white men, weaponized against people of color, with the works of POC - and especially that of POC women - being buried, appropriated, or ignored. To this day, POC face barriers to entering scientific fields, yet the onus for changing the status quo is placed on them.
Dr. Prescod-Weinstein demands more than this, specifically from those who hold (and have always held) power in the scientific community. She expects fellow scientists to learn of the societal and historical factors of their areas of study, specifically the racism and exploitation, and apply this to how they approach their subject. She expects fellow professors to learn and respect their students' pronouns so as to not alienate anyone in their classes. She expects recognition for all the uncredited laborers who help make science happen - the housekeeping teams in laboratories and universities, those who've raised scientists and scientists' children, the underpaid admin who've helped type research papers - all who've facilitated science in ways never before regarded as valid or important.
She also discusses several ways she is treated differently than the white men in her field. In addition to microaggressions, and having to work so much harder to still be seen as less, Chapter 11 specifically discusses her experience with rape. It is gutting to read. When she described having a panic flareup and missing three days' work on formulas, knowing that a hypothetical white colleague who didn't have to contend with rape and racism would've been able to accomplish more than her over those three days, I just started bawling.
Such a powerful book. If you're in the right place for it, I couldn't recommend it more.
Content warning: Racism, SA
Truly an amazing book. Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, a black, Jewish, American, queer, agender (she/her pronouns) Astrophysicist explores the intersectionality of her life's work and her identity.
Science historically has been a field populated by white men, weaponized against people of color, with the works of POC - and especially that of POC women - being buried, appropriated, or ignored. To this day, POC face barriers to entering scientific fields, yet the onus for changing the status quo is placed on them.
Dr. Prescod-Weinstein demands more than this, specifically from those who hold (and have always held) power in the scientific community. She expects fellow scientists to learn of the societal and historical factors of their areas of study, specifically the racism and exploitation, and apply this to how they approach their subject. She expects fellow professors to learn and respect their students' pronouns so as to not alienate anyone in their classes. She expects recognition for all the uncredited laborers who help make science happen - the housekeeping teams in laboratories and universities, those who've raised scientists and scientists' children, the underpaid admin who've helped type research papers - all who've facilitated science in ways never before regarded as valid or important.
She also discusses several ways she is treated differently than the white men in her field. In addition to microaggressions, and having to work so much harder to still be seen as less, Chapter 11 specifically discusses her experience with rape. It is gutting to read. When she described having a panic flareup and missing three days' work on formulas, knowing that a hypothetical white colleague who didn't have to contend with rape and racism would've been able to accomplish more than her over those three days, I just started bawling.
Such a powerful book. If you're in the right place for it, I couldn't recommend it more.
June 5, 2021
three stars for the muddled but interesting first half (pop science), one star for the grotesque and largely unreadable sociology/invective of the back half. if you liked bell hooks, you'll love prescod-weinstein...but why? predictably, it's a hectoring SJW screed from someone who calls herself "silenced" and "oppressed" despite the fact that she has tenure, gets interviewed all the time, and had this book shoved down our throats by a massive marketing campaign. get over yourself, lady.
April 16, 2021
This is a lot less about space than I was expecting. I imagine some people are somewhere on the Internet arguing that this isn't even about science, but I fully accept and agree with Prescod-Weinsteins assessment that the social sciences and the politics of science matter.
I hope others go into this as unknowing as I was and find themselves wondering why the word 'vagina' appears in a book about the cosmos. We don't always get what we want, but in this case that was no bad thing.
I'm thankful for this book for teaching me a little about what's going on in the space between Chanda Prescod-Weinsteins ears.
I hope others go into this as unknowing as I was and find themselves wondering why the word 'vagina' appears in a book about the cosmos. We don't always get what we want, but in this case that was no bad thing.
I'm thankful for this book for teaching me a little about what's going on in the space between Chanda Prescod-Weinsteins ears.
December 8, 2020
The Disordered Cosmos by Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is an all-encompassing guide to the state of race, gender, and other social issues in science, particularly particle physics. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein split the book into three sections that each focus on a part of her thesis: the science behind physics, spacetime, and particles; race, focusing primarily on Black scientists; and how physics and race intertwine and must be used to better society.
There is A LOT going on in this book. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein makes a good attempt at explaining astronomy and physics in a way that makes it interesting and easy to comprehend (or as much as one can with such a complicated and broad subject). She keeps the thread of dark matter and the topics that fill her day to day research in mind throughout the book. Anyone who has spent time with scientists knows that this is a hard task since many times science is only applicable to other science to them. However, because of her scientific background, research is referenced a tremendous amount and may sometimes seem too much like an academic paper for someone looking to read the book straight through.
The author is also able to connect her science to topics that are especially timely today while introducing concepts that many readers may have little to no experience with. Substantial time is spent explaining the effects of colonialism on science, the effects of science on indigenous people, and how society and science, in particular, has been built on the backs of marginalized groups. Topics like the building of telescopes in Hawaii and the emotional labor that Black academics must perform are discussed in-depth and will hopefully awaken many other scientists to these topics.
I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a more nuanced view of race, gender, and other social issues in the world of science. I believe it would especially be beneficial to graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and faculty in all aspects of academia as it will certainly make them think of the ways that they can improve communication and acknowledge the racial and societal implications of the academy.
I gave this book 4/5 stars because it's easily one of the most interesting and critical books that I have read this year but it is also a difficult read with a primarily academic tone that takes effort to get through.
There is A LOT going on in this book. Dr. Prescod-Weinstein makes a good attempt at explaining astronomy and physics in a way that makes it interesting and easy to comprehend (or as much as one can with such a complicated and broad subject). She keeps the thread of dark matter and the topics that fill her day to day research in mind throughout the book. Anyone who has spent time with scientists knows that this is a hard task since many times science is only applicable to other science to them. However, because of her scientific background, research is referenced a tremendous amount and may sometimes seem too much like an academic paper for someone looking to read the book straight through.
The author is also able to connect her science to topics that are especially timely today while introducing concepts that many readers may have little to no experience with. Substantial time is spent explaining the effects of colonialism on science, the effects of science on indigenous people, and how society and science, in particular, has been built on the backs of marginalized groups. Topics like the building of telescopes in Hawaii and the emotional labor that Black academics must perform are discussed in-depth and will hopefully awaken many other scientists to these topics.
I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a more nuanced view of race, gender, and other social issues in the world of science. I believe it would especially be beneficial to graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and faculty in all aspects of academia as it will certainly make them think of the ways that they can improve communication and acknowledge the racial and societal implications of the academy.
I gave this book 4/5 stars because it's easily one of the most interesting and critical books that I have read this year but it is also a difficult read with a primarily academic tone that takes effort to get through.
May 24, 2021
All scientists should read this book. All social scientists should read this book. Anyone in academia, or academia-adjacent, or at all involved in education should read this book. Anyone interested in understanding racism in this country not just as an abstraction, but as a fundamental part of the institutions and systems that we hold dear--that employ us, that spark our imagination and propel us forward, and that we credit with "progress"--should read this book.
Really just everyone should read this book. An absolute stunner.
Really just everyone should read this book. An absolute stunner.
March 31, 2021
4.5 stars
March 15, 2021
I love this book so much that I bought a 2nd copy for my sister & niece & am working REAL hard not deplete my funds by buying and sending copies to my friends. If you love looking at the stars, learning about space time, and practicing science ethically and humanely, read. this. book. Make sure your library carries it, buy it for the budding scientist and the professional scientist. Read it so we can get better at building equitable and caring relations with each other. Thank you Dr. Prescod-Weinstein for reminding me of the incredible awesomeness of our universe and the work we can do to make our world safe, joyful, and just. 🌞🌗🌍🪐💫🌚
November 3, 2021
This might just win 'best book' for me of 2021. It is appropriate that I complete my book-reading goal with this excellent exposing of the totalitarianism of white cis guys in astro/physics/science. Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is a rare astrophysicist: agender, black, jewish and willing to speak out about the oppression of females and POC in gaining research positions and respect in her favorite field of Astrophysics.
I found this book on my new nonfiction shelf at the library at 523.01. I grabbed it as I do all new astrophysics books at my library. But I was pleasantly surprised to find this book belongs next to anti-racism (305.8) or gender (305.3) or society problems (362). Sure, there is some astrophysics technical content in this book - but not much. There is a great deal of discussion of the problems in astrophysics with racism, lack of queer support, and very low female respect/participation.
Dr. P-W has a love for the heavens. She wants everyone to have the freedom to be allowed to see the milky way and desire to study cosmology. Her description of REALLY seeing the Milky Way galaxy from the high and dry land of Chile brings goosebumps to me. For any of you that have ever really seen the Milky Way from a dark-sky location, you realize how it got its name. This milky band of stars in the sky is bright enough to put a strong shadow of you on the ground. Familiar stars are lost in the thousands more that you can see. This freedom to see these stars (and to wish to explore) belongs to everyone, and there should not be obstacles holding anyone back from their love for science.
The limited physics in this book is presented to quickly provide an analogy for the white-cis-guy domination of this field. For example: "Gravitational Lensing: If a galaxy is extremely far away, and in between us and that galaxy is yet another galaxy, then the light from the farthest one can be bent around the closer one and we may see an arc or multiple images of the distant galaxy above/below/to-the-side of the other galaxy. This is called Strong Gravitational Lensing. The mass in the galaxies that hold them together must be far beyond the stars that shine in them, and it is Dark Matter that outnumber regular matter 5:1. Dark Matter is Dr. P-W 's main field.
The analogy used is for weak gravitational lensing. So imagine looking at almost ANYTHING in the far distant space. Surely all the light must be traveling past massive objects. Maybe a huge galaxy is not in perfect alignment. But even just a star. It was the bending of light from the Pleiades stars around our Sun during a solar eclipse that helped prove Einstein's view of warped space near strong gravity. Thus most of the light we see has some weak gravitational lensing surely happening.
This is the racism present in astrophysics. It may not be loud and overt (like Strong Gravitational Lensing). But it is there (Weak Gravitational Lensing). When professors become advisors for grad students, it is the white men that pick the white men that are most like themselves to mentor. Thus the non-white, and/or non-male faculty pick up all the other students that may require more needs per their lack of privilege. This makes these already stressed faculty member need to work ever harder.
If I had a highlighter, I would have multiple lines highlighted on ever single page of this book. It is so fantastic that the publisher let her speak! I just read an article in the NY Times newspaper today about the upcoming launch of the JWST (James Webb Space Telescope) and some controversy of its name. This telescope will replace the Hubble Space Telescope (surely, you've heard of that one). Well, the JWST will be "The Telescope" for the next few decades or more.
James Webb was a NASA administrator during the 60's that got a lot accomplished for NASA. But he also presided over a NASA that was very homophobic and did nothing to stop it. Multiple scientists have come forth in favor of changing the name of the JWST. The NY Times article cited multiple quotes from Dr. Prescod-Weinstein per her quest to help in this activism.
As a scientist/physicist/amateur-astronomer, I completely agree 100% with everything Dr P-W says in this book. I just can't believe that this is the first I've ever seen it all put down in print. I was glad to see her cite a recent publication in Physics asking University physics departments to see the statistics and to use the resources to make changes: https://www.aip.org/sites/default/fil... I HAVE to read this! What a great resource.
The citations and recommended reading for each chapter start with some of the classic astrophysics books by Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Sean Carroll, Lee Smolin, Vera Rubin, Alan Guth and Katie Mack. But mixed in here is Sue Bradford Edwards "Hidden Human Computers: The Black Women of NASA".
By Ch 4, we add ku'ualoha ho'omanawanui writing "Voices of Fire: Reweaving the Literary Lei of Pele and Hi'iaka" Dr P-W talks of the land-taking for science/telescopes of indigenous people of Hawaii. Why did scientists not protest this?
Chapter 5 is entitled "The Physics of Melanin" - guess what this is about?
Citations/readings:
Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code
Venus in the Dark: Blackness and Beauty in Popular Culture
Passion "Poem for South African Women"
"From Genesis to Gene Sequencing: Historical Progress in the Understanding of Skin Color.", by Millington and Levell
Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-First Century
Afrofuturism: The World of Black Sci-Fi and Fantasy Culture
Ch 6: Black People are Luminous Matter
Ch 7: Who is a Scientist
Ch 8: Let Astro/Physics be the Dream it Used to Be
(citing Audre Lorde - not your standard reading in a 523.01 Astrophysics book!)
Ch 9: The Anti-Patriarchy Agender
American Physics Society: https://aps.org/programs/lgbt/upload/...
LGBT Climate in Physics
Misogynoir Transformed: Black Women's Digital Resistance
Ch 10: Wages for Scientific Housework
Sex, Race and Class: The Perspective of Winning: A Selection of Writings 1952-2011
Ch 11: Rape is Part of This Scientific Story
Dr. P-W was raped. Short chapter. But it is part of her astrophysics thinking.
Ch 12 The Point of Science: Lessons from the Mauna
(10 non-physics books cited here, all about indigenous people!)
Ch 13: Cosmological Dreams Under Totalitarianism - My Favorite Chapter
Many non-physics citations, all brought into the astro/physics context.
Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880
The Politics of Pure ScienceThe Collected Poems of Langston Hughes
Colonialism and Science: Saint Domingue and the Old Regime
"We are the Scientists Against a Fascist Government", by Dr. P-W
Race and the Totalitarian Century
Freedom's Laboratory: The Cold War Struggle for the Soul of Science
Ch 14: Black Feminist Physics at the End of the World - My 2nd Favorite Chapter
2 full pages of recommended reading in the appendix!
Many citations throughout this chapter - Dr. P-W's writing shines clearly here.
Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment
A Nation Rising: Hawaiian Movements for Life, Land, and Sovereignty
Suffering For Science: Reason and Sacrifice in Modern America
Solid State Insurrection: How the Science of Substance Made American Physics Matter
Research Is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods
Extra chapter: Dear Mama, This is What My Freedom Dream Looks Like - as Dr. P-W thanks her Mom, the activist.
Freedom Dreams: The Black Radical Imagination
As you see my astro/physics bookshelves and glbt reading you will see why this books ranks as my best so far in 2021. This is a very REAL look at how our science has a privilege group that continues down its path of inertia of totalitarianism. Dr P-W is a fantastic writer and scientist that is finally getting some well deserved recognition.
I found this book on my new nonfiction shelf at the library at 523.01. I grabbed it as I do all new astrophysics books at my library. But I was pleasantly surprised to find this book belongs next to anti-racism (305.8) or gender (305.3) or society problems (362). Sure, there is some astrophysics technical content in this book - but not much. There is a great deal of discussion of the problems in astrophysics with racism, lack of queer support, and very low female respect/participation.
Dr. P-W has a love for the heavens. She wants everyone to have the freedom to be allowed to see the milky way and desire to study cosmology. Her description of REALLY seeing the Milky Way galaxy from the high and dry land of Chile brings goosebumps to me. For any of you that have ever really seen the Milky Way from a dark-sky location, you realize how it got its name. This milky band of stars in the sky is bright enough to put a strong shadow of you on the ground. Familiar stars are lost in the thousands more that you can see. This freedom to see these stars (and to wish to explore) belongs to everyone, and there should not be obstacles holding anyone back from their love for science.
The limited physics in this book is presented to quickly provide an analogy for the white-cis-guy domination of this field. For example: "Gravitational Lensing: If a galaxy is extremely far away, and in between us and that galaxy is yet another galaxy, then the light from the farthest one can be bent around the closer one and we may see an arc or multiple images of the distant galaxy above/below/to-the-side of the other galaxy. This is called Strong Gravitational Lensing. The mass in the galaxies that hold them together must be far beyond the stars that shine in them, and it is Dark Matter that outnumber regular matter 5:1. Dark Matter is Dr. P-W 's main field.
The analogy used is for weak gravitational lensing. So imagine looking at almost ANYTHING in the far distant space. Surely all the light must be traveling past massive objects. Maybe a huge galaxy is not in perfect alignment. But even just a star. It was the bending of light from the Pleiades stars around our Sun during a solar eclipse that helped prove Einstein's view of warped space near strong gravity. Thus most of the light we see has some weak gravitational lensing surely happening.
This is the racism present in astrophysics. It may not be loud and overt (like Strong Gravitational Lensing). But it is there (Weak Gravitational Lensing). When professors become advisors for grad students, it is the white men that pick the white men that are most like themselves to mentor. Thus the non-white, and/or non-male faculty pick up all the other students that may require more needs per their lack of privilege. This makes these already stressed faculty member need to work ever harder.
If I had a highlighter, I would have multiple lines highlighted on ever single page of this book. It is so fantastic that the publisher let her speak! I just read an article in the NY Times newspaper today about the upcoming launch of the JWST (James Webb Space Telescope) and some controversy of its name. This telescope will replace the Hubble Space Telescope (surely, you've heard of that one). Well, the JWST will be "The Telescope" for the next few decades or more.
James Webb was a NASA administrator during the 60's that got a lot accomplished for NASA. But he also presided over a NASA that was very homophobic and did nothing to stop it. Multiple scientists have come forth in favor of changing the name of the JWST. The NY Times article cited multiple quotes from Dr. Prescod-Weinstein per her quest to help in this activism.
As a scientist/physicist/amateur-astronomer, I completely agree 100% with everything Dr P-W says in this book. I just can't believe that this is the first I've ever seen it all put down in print. I was glad to see her cite a recent publication in Physics asking University physics departments to see the statistics and to use the resources to make changes: https://www.aip.org/sites/default/fil... I HAVE to read this! What a great resource.
The citations and recommended reading for each chapter start with some of the classic astrophysics books by Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Sean Carroll, Lee Smolin, Vera Rubin, Alan Guth and Katie Mack. But mixed in here is Sue Bradford Edwards "Hidden Human Computers: The Black Women of NASA".
By Ch 4, we add ku'ualoha ho'omanawanui writing "Voices of Fire: Reweaving the Literary Lei of Pele and Hi'iaka" Dr P-W talks of the land-taking for science/telescopes of indigenous people of Hawaii. Why did scientists not protest this?
Chapter 5 is entitled "The Physics of Melanin" - guess what this is about?
Citations/readings:
Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code
Venus in the Dark: Blackness and Beauty in Popular Culture
Passion "Poem for South African Women"
"From Genesis to Gene Sequencing: Historical Progress in the Understanding of Skin Color.", by Millington and Levell
Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-First Century
Afrofuturism: The World of Black Sci-Fi and Fantasy Culture
Ch 6: Black People are Luminous Matter
Ch 7: Who is a Scientist
Ch 8: Let Astro/Physics be the Dream it Used to Be
(citing Audre Lorde - not your standard reading in a 523.01 Astrophysics book!)
Ch 9: The Anti-Patriarchy Agender
American Physics Society: https://aps.org/programs/lgbt/upload/...
LGBT Climate in Physics
Misogynoir Transformed: Black Women's Digital Resistance
Ch 10: Wages for Scientific Housework
Sex, Race and Class: The Perspective of Winning: A Selection of Writings 1952-2011
Ch 11: Rape is Part of This Scientific Story
Dr. P-W was raped. Short chapter. But it is part of her astrophysics thinking.
Ch 12 The Point of Science: Lessons from the Mauna
(10 non-physics books cited here, all about indigenous people!)
Ch 13: Cosmological Dreams Under Totalitarianism - My Favorite Chapter
Many non-physics citations, all brought into the astro/physics context.
Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880
The Politics of Pure ScienceThe Collected Poems of Langston Hughes
Colonialism and Science: Saint Domingue and the Old Regime
"We are the Scientists Against a Fascist Government", by Dr. P-W
Race and the Totalitarian Century
Freedom's Laboratory: The Cold War Struggle for the Soul of Science
Ch 14: Black Feminist Physics at the End of the World - My 2nd Favorite Chapter
2 full pages of recommended reading in the appendix!
Many citations throughout this chapter - Dr. P-W's writing shines clearly here.
Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment
A Nation Rising: Hawaiian Movements for Life, Land, and Sovereignty
Suffering For Science: Reason and Sacrifice in Modern America
Solid State Insurrection: How the Science of Substance Made American Physics Matter
Research Is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods
Extra chapter: Dear Mama, This is What My Freedom Dream Looks Like - as Dr. P-W thanks her Mom, the activist.
Freedom Dreams: The Black Radical Imagination
As you see my astro/physics bookshelves and glbt reading you will see why this books ranks as my best so far in 2021. This is a very REAL look at how our science has a privilege group that continues down its path of inertia of totalitarianism. Dr P-W is a fantastic writer and scientist that is finally getting some well deserved recognition.
March 26, 2022
Thank you to NetGalley for a copy of this book in exchange for a fair and honest review.
Check out my reading vlog:
The Disordered Cosmos is probably the best book I have read all year. The book starts focusing on cosmology and particle physics giving a broad background. Then it evolves into being a focused discussion on the author's primary focus of research, one area being Dark Matter. In this way, it works well as a science book. She gives a good background of the science in a way that I think really helps get the reader interested in what it is she does and the cosmos. This is common in science writings, especially in cosmology. I found her writing as good as, if not better than, many people who write popular cosmology books. I have noticed some reviewers complain because they find this section difficult to get through, but I would urge you not to be turned away because of this. There seems to be this assumption that if you can’t understand everything in a book then it isn’t worth reading. Well, I’ll tell you a little secret: no one understands moderately advanced topics in science their first time exposed to it. It takes time, and part of that process means being willing to get confused. You’re likely to still leave this big with a better appreciation for the science than when you started. If you’re interested in pursuing it further, then you can, and if not, that’s okay too. This is still meant for the average reader.
I think what really makes this book shine is when it transitions into being a larger conversation about race in science. She starts with discussion about the science of blackness, for example focus on melanin. She uses ideas in space physics to study blackness to give a new perspective on what it means to be black. The decision to do this is both fascinating and an effective transition from the cosmological discussion to the broad sociological discussions she has in the book. She goes on to discuss life as a scientist. She explores what it means to be a scientist, especially for her as a queer agender black Jewish fem scientist. In doing so, she explores how discrimination and racism has integrated itself into the institutions of science and the process of science itself. Then she goes on to talk about the ways in which it needs to be improved. One of the major ideas she explores is on the interconnectedness of everything. As a physicist, she is able to take this to a quantum level, but it extends far beyond that. Everything we do in science is influenced by the society we live in, including the colonial and racist mindsets within said society. If we do not acknowledge how we interact with our science, then we will continue to do flawed science. Part of that means ostracizing other voices and leading to the low level of scientists who are black or who challenge the traditional gender binary.
For those who are interested, there was a recent(ish) paper specifically on this topic in AGU Publications titled, “Double jeopardy in Astronomy and planetary science: women of color face greater risks of gendered and racial harassment,” Clancy et al., 2017. This discusses just how prominent an issue this is within our (the planetary science and astronomy) community. Furthermore, if you are interested in exploring more books on science, gender, and race, I would direct you to the list of books Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein says inspired her in the writing of her book.
Now I could go on and on about this book, but I think really the best bet for you is just to pick it up and read it. I recommend it for everyone. While it may be someone esoteric in its science, I think you are seriously depriving yourself if you do not give it a shot. If you decide to pass on it because of the science, you would also be missing out on more nuanced conversation about science, representation, and the black experience in science. Read this book!
Check out my reading vlog:
The Disordered Cosmos is probably the best book I have read all year. The book starts focusing on cosmology and particle physics giving a broad background. Then it evolves into being a focused discussion on the author's primary focus of research, one area being Dark Matter. In this way, it works well as a science book. She gives a good background of the science in a way that I think really helps get the reader interested in what it is she does and the cosmos. This is common in science writings, especially in cosmology. I found her writing as good as, if not better than, many people who write popular cosmology books. I have noticed some reviewers complain because they find this section difficult to get through, but I would urge you not to be turned away because of this. There seems to be this assumption that if you can’t understand everything in a book then it isn’t worth reading. Well, I’ll tell you a little secret: no one understands moderately advanced topics in science their first time exposed to it. It takes time, and part of that process means being willing to get confused. You’re likely to still leave this big with a better appreciation for the science than when you started. If you’re interested in pursuing it further, then you can, and if not, that’s okay too. This is still meant for the average reader.
I think what really makes this book shine is when it transitions into being a larger conversation about race in science. She starts with discussion about the science of blackness, for example focus on melanin. She uses ideas in space physics to study blackness to give a new perspective on what it means to be black. The decision to do this is both fascinating and an effective transition from the cosmological discussion to the broad sociological discussions she has in the book. She goes on to discuss life as a scientist. She explores what it means to be a scientist, especially for her as a queer agender black Jewish fem scientist. In doing so, she explores how discrimination and racism has integrated itself into the institutions of science and the process of science itself. Then she goes on to talk about the ways in which it needs to be improved. One of the major ideas she explores is on the interconnectedness of everything. As a physicist, she is able to take this to a quantum level, but it extends far beyond that. Everything we do in science is influenced by the society we live in, including the colonial and racist mindsets within said society. If we do not acknowledge how we interact with our science, then we will continue to do flawed science. Part of that means ostracizing other voices and leading to the low level of scientists who are black or who challenge the traditional gender binary.
For those who are interested, there was a recent(ish) paper specifically on this topic in AGU Publications titled, “Double jeopardy in Astronomy and planetary science: women of color face greater risks of gendered and racial harassment,” Clancy et al., 2017. This discusses just how prominent an issue this is within our (the planetary science and astronomy) community. Furthermore, if you are interested in exploring more books on science, gender, and race, I would direct you to the list of books Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein says inspired her in the writing of her book.
Now I could go on and on about this book, but I think really the best bet for you is just to pick it up and read it. I recommend it for everyone. While it may be someone esoteric in its science, I think you are seriously depriving yourself if you do not give it a shot. If you decide to pass on it because of the science, you would also be missing out on more nuanced conversation about science, representation, and the black experience in science. Read this book!
June 21, 2021
I am a white, straight, American male. I enjoy reading and then writing reviews about what I read. I don't have a Twitter account, and I don't follow my Facebook account. I acquired "The Disordered Cosmos" through my local library. The book deceived me with its Dewey Decimal number. It should not be a 523; it should be somewhere in the 300s. However, I digress.
I don't know who the audience is for "The Disordered Cosmos," but it wasn't me. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is a black, agender, feminist Physicist. If you don't know that, she tells you. Prescod-Weinstein knows her physics, but she doesn't stick to just physics. She gallivants between discussing her interest in the Universe and a weird SJW manifesto. She can't decide between one or the other, and the book is less because of that. Find a focus Prescod-Weinstein. Choose either Physics or Sociology, but not both.
She finds problems with the language used in Quantum Chromodynamics. Apparently, she finds fault with the terms invented in the 1960s to describe concepts. Oh, boohoo. Woe is her for having to deal with language created to represent a conceptual framework. If she went into Computer Science, would she find fault with the Master/Slave terms used for Hard Drives?
She wants "people of color" included in physics. That's fine. I don't care about that either, but whining about it isn't going to help. That's all this book is; a blubbering whine-fest sprinkled here and there with actual physics. Next thing you know, she's complaining about "Dark" Matter. I should expect no less from such a scintillating paragon of Social Justice.
"The Disordered Cosmos" was loathsome. I dropped it on page 35.
I don't know who the audience is for "The Disordered Cosmos," but it wasn't me. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is a black, agender, feminist Physicist. If you don't know that, she tells you. Prescod-Weinstein knows her physics, but she doesn't stick to just physics. She gallivants between discussing her interest in the Universe and a weird SJW manifesto. She can't decide between one or the other, and the book is less because of that. Find a focus Prescod-Weinstein. Choose either Physics or Sociology, but not both.
She finds problems with the language used in Quantum Chromodynamics. Apparently, she finds fault with the terms invented in the 1960s to describe concepts. Oh, boohoo. Woe is her for having to deal with language created to represent a conceptual framework. If she went into Computer Science, would she find fault with the Master/Slave terms used for Hard Drives?
She wants "people of color" included in physics. That's fine. I don't care about that either, but whining about it isn't going to help. That's all this book is; a blubbering whine-fest sprinkled here and there with actual physics. Next thing you know, she's complaining about "Dark" Matter. I should expect no less from such a scintillating paragon of Social Justice.
"The Disordered Cosmos" was loathsome. I dropped it on page 35.
May 9, 2021
A breathtaking book that combines accessible and fun-to-read primers on astrophysics and quantum mechanics with a powerful reflection on the many ways in which the history and philosophy of Western science has been complicit with white supremacy. Moving, haunting, and profoundly inspiring, this beautifully written book is guaranteed to linger in the mind long after the last chapter’s emotional gut punch.
September 28, 2021
”My Black feminist thought about this story is: what are the conditions we need so that a thirteen-year-old Black kid and their single mom can go look at a dark night sky, away from artificial lights, and know what they are seeing? What health care structures, what food and housing security are needed? What science communication structures? What community structures? What relationship with the land do they need?”
About 43 years ago, I had to decide which university to attend. I knew I wanted to study maths, but that choice was a bit of a compromise because what I really wanted to study was astrophysics but I’m really not sure my parents believed I could get a job with a degree in astrophysics. I’m not absolutely sure they thought I’d succeed with a degree in maths, but they supported me in that choice. In practical terms, what this meant was that I searched university curricula looking for maths courses that included relativity and quantum theory: that was how I chose which universities to apply to. It worked out well because I found one, went there, met a girl and married her and we’re still happily married after almost 40 years. I might have used my degree a little bit in my first job, but not after that, really.
Anyway, all that is by way of explanation as to what initially drew me to this book. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is “an American and Barbadian theoretical cosmologist, and is both an Assistant Professor of Physics and Astronomy and a Core Faculty Member in Women's and Gender Studies at the University of New Hampshire”. As the blurb puts it ”In The Disordered Cosmos, Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein shares her love for physics, from the Standard Model of Particle Physics and what lies beyond it, to the physics of melanin in skin, to the latest theories of dark matter — all with a new spin informed by history, politics, and the wisdom of Star Trek.” This gave me two reasons for wanting to read the book: firstly, I liked the sound of the physics and secondly, it sounded like it would give me a new perspective and I like the idea of my preconceptions being challenged. Try as we might, we all carry preconceptions and one of the reasons I read is to have those challenged.
There’s a lot in this book and I will necessarily miss out a lot of things, probably a lot of very important things, so please forgive me for that. I will talk about my reaction to the book which naturally homes in on a few of the ideas and topics that stood out for me. Fundamentally, this book is a call for a more just practice of science: it seeks to combat what I think it is fair to say the book regards as the almost axiomatic racism and sexism built into the world of science:
”“Color” and “white as neutral” are here not as reflections of how the universe works, but rather how a homogeneous, white scientific community comes up with new names for stuff. Part of science, therefore, involves writing a dominant group’s social politics into the building blocks of a universe that exists far beyond and with little reference to our small planet and the apes that are responsible for melting its polar ice caps.”
Prescod-Weinstein is Black and describes herself as “a pansexual agender cissex woman”. So, racism is not the only issue she has had to face. The book builds a story based around the prejudices she has encountered and proposes some potential ways forward. It has to be said that it focuses more on the issues and less on the solutions.
”This is not to say that the laws of the universe are not universal—but it may be that what we think we know is incomplete and will not be complete until we are able to think beyond how white men are trained to think in a Western educational setting.”
I saw a thread through the book that built the core arguments. Others will see other things. Prescod-Weinstein starts with her love of physics and talks us through some theory. You will see reviews that say these chapters are difficult. That’s probably true, although I think I was helped by my lifelong interest in the subject. I am a long, long way from any expertise or in-depth knowledge, but I had enough to not get lost here. She ends this section with a discussion of “dark matter” which is a completely fascinating subject. From “dark matter”, we turn to melanin, the substance that gives dark colour to skin and this opens up some of the discussion of racism in science. Prescod-Weinstein dislikes the comparison of “dark skin” and “dark matter”: she understands the motivation (invisibility etc.) but disagrees with some of the implications. What she does see is a parallel between racism and “weak gravitational lensing” which is where gravity causes a distortion of the true shape of something that isn’t visible to everyone. And she draws parallels between gender and particle physics: if quantum theory has shown us anything, it has shown us that the universe is non-binary and fluid. This leads onto the discussion about issues for non-binary people in the world of science. The domination of cisheteropatriarchy in the world of science leads to a discussion of power: at what point does science stop being a search for knowledge and become a search for power? And this leads to a discussion of science’s impact on indigenous people and their culture (colonisation).
That, as you can see, is a lot to think about. The book is written very accessibly. In fact, it often reads as though someone is transcribing what the author says as she chats with someone (at one point she says ”I was super stoked about this”). I was conscious as I read that I was reading one person’s view: this is a very subjective perspective. But it presents some challenging thinking and I always appreciate reading stuff that comes at life from a different perspective to my own and asks me to think things through in a new way.
About 43 years ago, I had to decide which university to attend. I knew I wanted to study maths, but that choice was a bit of a compromise because what I really wanted to study was astrophysics but I’m really not sure my parents believed I could get a job with a degree in astrophysics. I’m not absolutely sure they thought I’d succeed with a degree in maths, but they supported me in that choice. In practical terms, what this meant was that I searched university curricula looking for maths courses that included relativity and quantum theory: that was how I chose which universities to apply to. It worked out well because I found one, went there, met a girl and married her and we’re still happily married after almost 40 years. I might have used my degree a little bit in my first job, but not after that, really.
Anyway, all that is by way of explanation as to what initially drew me to this book. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is “an American and Barbadian theoretical cosmologist, and is both an Assistant Professor of Physics and Astronomy and a Core Faculty Member in Women's and Gender Studies at the University of New Hampshire”. As the blurb puts it ”In The Disordered Cosmos, Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein shares her love for physics, from the Standard Model of Particle Physics and what lies beyond it, to the physics of melanin in skin, to the latest theories of dark matter — all with a new spin informed by history, politics, and the wisdom of Star Trek.” This gave me two reasons for wanting to read the book: firstly, I liked the sound of the physics and secondly, it sounded like it would give me a new perspective and I like the idea of my preconceptions being challenged. Try as we might, we all carry preconceptions and one of the reasons I read is to have those challenged.
There’s a lot in this book and I will necessarily miss out a lot of things, probably a lot of very important things, so please forgive me for that. I will talk about my reaction to the book which naturally homes in on a few of the ideas and topics that stood out for me. Fundamentally, this book is a call for a more just practice of science: it seeks to combat what I think it is fair to say the book regards as the almost axiomatic racism and sexism built into the world of science:
”“Color” and “white as neutral” are here not as reflections of how the universe works, but rather how a homogeneous, white scientific community comes up with new names for stuff. Part of science, therefore, involves writing a dominant group’s social politics into the building blocks of a universe that exists far beyond and with little reference to our small planet and the apes that are responsible for melting its polar ice caps.”
Prescod-Weinstein is Black and describes herself as “a pansexual agender cissex woman”. So, racism is not the only issue she has had to face. The book builds a story based around the prejudices she has encountered and proposes some potential ways forward. It has to be said that it focuses more on the issues and less on the solutions.
”This is not to say that the laws of the universe are not universal—but it may be that what we think we know is incomplete and will not be complete until we are able to think beyond how white men are trained to think in a Western educational setting.”
I saw a thread through the book that built the core arguments. Others will see other things. Prescod-Weinstein starts with her love of physics and talks us through some theory. You will see reviews that say these chapters are difficult. That’s probably true, although I think I was helped by my lifelong interest in the subject. I am a long, long way from any expertise or in-depth knowledge, but I had enough to not get lost here. She ends this section with a discussion of “dark matter” which is a completely fascinating subject. From “dark matter”, we turn to melanin, the substance that gives dark colour to skin and this opens up some of the discussion of racism in science. Prescod-Weinstein dislikes the comparison of “dark skin” and “dark matter”: she understands the motivation (invisibility etc.) but disagrees with some of the implications. What she does see is a parallel between racism and “weak gravitational lensing” which is where gravity causes a distortion of the true shape of something that isn’t visible to everyone. And she draws parallels between gender and particle physics: if quantum theory has shown us anything, it has shown us that the universe is non-binary and fluid. This leads onto the discussion about issues for non-binary people in the world of science. The domination of cisheteropatriarchy in the world of science leads to a discussion of power: at what point does science stop being a search for knowledge and become a search for power? And this leads to a discussion of science’s impact on indigenous people and their culture (colonisation).
That, as you can see, is a lot to think about. The book is written very accessibly. In fact, it often reads as though someone is transcribing what the author says as she chats with someone (at one point she says ”I was super stoked about this”). I was conscious as I read that I was reading one person’s view: this is a very subjective perspective. But it presents some challenging thinking and I always appreciate reading stuff that comes at life from a different perspective to my own and asks me to think things through in a new way.
February 10, 2021
This was a DNF for me. I'm reviewing it because I think there is a great audience for this book, but I am not it. Chanda is one of the most interesting humans and the writing is lovely. This is a science book, not a lay people's science book. The story is really important and I want people to read it. If you took upper elective science courses in college and have a higher level understanding of chemistry, physics, and the universe as a whole: this is a book for you. The intersection of race brought in, historically and from the author's personal experience is something I never would have thought about and for me, that's why this book is so important. I think for many people who have strong science backgrounds this will be a 5 star read.
July 23, 2021
I kind of loved this book. My favourite science books discuss how society influences the science and vice versa and this one does this masterfully.
November 24, 2021
As a layperson interested in astrophysics and cosmology, I generally get interested in any newer books coming out that cater at least somewhat to my demographic. But, just like the fields themselves, the pool of writers tends to be fairly one-dimensional in terms of gender and usually race. I also often wish scientists would expand their discussions of the specifics of their field to how social aspects fit into it and their personal experiences. As a result, I was anticipating the release of Chanda Prescod-Weinstein's "The Disordered Cosmos: A Journey into Dark Matter, Spacetime, and Dreams Deferred" as soon as I found out about it. It took me a minute to get to, but I am glad I finally did. The author breaks many molds with this book and I think the field is better for it.
I will admit that I expected a bit more of the specifics of astrophysics and Prescod-Weinstein's focus and work in this book. It was a little disappointing that that only made up a smaller section in the beginning, and a large section of that was based on overview. I left knowing more about the author's life and views on social justice (which I also enjoyed) than I did her work in astrophysics and cosmology. So, I consider this to be more of a scientist's memoir with a science writing bend than I do a strictly pop-science book. Nonetheless, I think it is a valuable contribution to all of those genres. I actually think it could be good that the title "tricks" some readers into a book that spans all of these genres because Prescod-Weinstein touches on so many issues that have plagued the sciences for centuries.
The author captures well what it is like to straddle multiple positions and identities within and outside her profession. She is the first Black woman to receive positions and acknowledgement for many things and that is a shame. I recall that before this book existed, I searched for texts by Black women and struggled to find them. As Prescod-Weinstein shows though, that is not because they didn't exist. She takes us far back to Harriet Tubman using the North Star as a guide during her liberations of/with enslaved Africans. She discusses all of the things that go into making science happen outside of just the experiments themselves. We not only rely on principal investigators and statisticians, but also on those who take out the trash and maintain the buildings in which sciences take place. Covid-19 did wake many people up to the reality of how "essential workers" are "heroes" that hold things together. But, those people have been holding things together outside of the pandemic for as long as they've existed. What would the world look like without people working grocery stores, sanitation, etc? In places where garbage collectors have gone on strike, we can see how quickly streets can turn into a toxic wasteland without them. Furthermore, there is literal science methods and math involved in many of these professions. So, the author talking about all of these people "doing science" is a welcome addition to the long history of highlighting only a select few with the most privilege and publications.
Prescod-Weinstein talks about her childhood love of cosmology and how hard her mother worked in order to make sure she had access to learning materials and opportunities- things many people who are interested in similar topics never get to have. She discusses how even folks who make it to university can still struggle to break though any ceilings if their university is less wealthy and does not give them access to journals and materials to excel. She talks about how efforts towards "diversity and inclusion" focus far too much on adding a little color to their photos rather than actually support and understanding marginalized scientists. She discusses hardships and abuses she has dealt with more personally throughout the book in classic style of memoir. These include experiences of assault and harassment by people she chooses not to name publicly for fear of backlash and of what would happen to those she would be outing.
The only thing that made me bristle was her discussion of transgender issues, including her own gender labels. I know that we all need to be careful with "gatekeeping" as people are often questioning and trying to figure things out. I know that any questioning of anyone will always lead to some people being pissed off about it, and I am fine with that being fired in my direction. Many of us who now ID as trans and have transitioned in many or all ways possible went through this phases of experimentation and shifting labels for ourselves- this is generally a good thing. All people- including cis people- playing with gender norms will likely result in a better world. My issue is how she is speaking as an authority with a very wide reach while coming from a place where she doesn't seem to understand what terms mean or what her personal relationship to gender is. I won't dissect every bit, but I will say that her description of herself is the definition of being a cisgender woman. Talking about being agender and marginally transgender is adding to the increasing phenomenon of LGBTQ+ terms ceasing to have any meaning whatsoever. I think that she- and she is certainly not the first- should spend more time exploring and understanding themselves before writing book sections on these topics. When questions of gender nonconformity and being trans become dominated by gender conforming, comfortable with everything associated with their AGAB/ASAB, cis/heteronormatively presenting, etc people, we get to the point where pronouns are given more space than violence, healthcare access, etc, which is precisely what Prescod-Weinstein does (though she does touch on some of the latter.) I will stop there for now because this is already dominating to much of this review as I worry failure to explain myself is going to be used as ammo against her or me- which I do not want.
Overall, this book is a great memoir and essay collection that creates many bridges with science writing. It starts many valuable conversations that I hope people will be brave enough to explore in their own lives and laboratories. I think that Chanda Prescod-Weinstein took many big risks in putting this book out there and in her public discussion of struggles with oppression in STEM fields. For that she should be commended. The book is also well written and interesting in general, so I can't recommend it enough.
This was also posted to my blog.
I will admit that I expected a bit more of the specifics of astrophysics and Prescod-Weinstein's focus and work in this book. It was a little disappointing that that only made up a smaller section in the beginning, and a large section of that was based on overview. I left knowing more about the author's life and views on social justice (which I also enjoyed) than I did her work in astrophysics and cosmology. So, I consider this to be more of a scientist's memoir with a science writing bend than I do a strictly pop-science book. Nonetheless, I think it is a valuable contribution to all of those genres. I actually think it could be good that the title "tricks" some readers into a book that spans all of these genres because Prescod-Weinstein touches on so many issues that have plagued the sciences for centuries.
The author captures well what it is like to straddle multiple positions and identities within and outside her profession. She is the first Black woman to receive positions and acknowledgement for many things and that is a shame. I recall that before this book existed, I searched for texts by Black women and struggled to find them. As Prescod-Weinstein shows though, that is not because they didn't exist. She takes us far back to Harriet Tubman using the North Star as a guide during her liberations of/with enslaved Africans. She discusses all of the things that go into making science happen outside of just the experiments themselves. We not only rely on principal investigators and statisticians, but also on those who take out the trash and maintain the buildings in which sciences take place. Covid-19 did wake many people up to the reality of how "essential workers" are "heroes" that hold things together. But, those people have been holding things together outside of the pandemic for as long as they've existed. What would the world look like without people working grocery stores, sanitation, etc? In places where garbage collectors have gone on strike, we can see how quickly streets can turn into a toxic wasteland without them. Furthermore, there is literal science methods and math involved in many of these professions. So, the author talking about all of these people "doing science" is a welcome addition to the long history of highlighting only a select few with the most privilege and publications.
Prescod-Weinstein talks about her childhood love of cosmology and how hard her mother worked in order to make sure she had access to learning materials and opportunities- things many people who are interested in similar topics never get to have. She discusses how even folks who make it to university can still struggle to break though any ceilings if their university is less wealthy and does not give them access to journals and materials to excel. She talks about how efforts towards "diversity and inclusion" focus far too much on adding a little color to their photos rather than actually support and understanding marginalized scientists. She discusses hardships and abuses she has dealt with more personally throughout the book in classic style of memoir. These include experiences of assault and harassment by people she chooses not to name publicly for fear of backlash and of what would happen to those she would be outing.
The only thing that made me bristle was her discussion of transgender issues, including her own gender labels. I know that we all need to be careful with "gatekeeping" as people are often questioning and trying to figure things out. I know that any questioning of anyone will always lead to some people being pissed off about it, and I am fine with that being fired in my direction. Many of us who now ID as trans and have transitioned in many or all ways possible went through this phases of experimentation and shifting labels for ourselves- this is generally a good thing. All people- including cis people- playing with gender norms will likely result in a better world. My issue is how she is speaking as an authority with a very wide reach while coming from a place where she doesn't seem to understand what terms mean or what her personal relationship to gender is. I won't dissect every bit, but I will say that her description of herself is the definition of being a cisgender woman. Talking about being agender and marginally transgender is adding to the increasing phenomenon of LGBTQ+ terms ceasing to have any meaning whatsoever. I think that she- and she is certainly not the first- should spend more time exploring and understanding themselves before writing book sections on these topics. When questions of gender nonconformity and being trans become dominated by gender conforming, comfortable with everything associated with their AGAB/ASAB, cis/heteronormatively presenting, etc people, we get to the point where pronouns are given more space than violence, healthcare access, etc, which is precisely what Prescod-Weinstein does (though she does touch on some of the latter.) I will stop there for now because this is already dominating to much of this review as I worry failure to explain myself is going to be used as ammo against her or me- which I do not want.
Overall, this book is a great memoir and essay collection that creates many bridges with science writing. It starts many valuable conversations that I hope people will be brave enough to explore in their own lives and laboratories. I think that Chanda Prescod-Weinstein took many big risks in putting this book out there and in her public discussion of struggles with oppression in STEM fields. For that she should be commended. The book is also well written and interesting in general, so I can't recommend it enough.
This was also posted to my blog.
August 22, 2023
I've been reading some stellar (no pun intended) memoirs this year! This is among them. Rtc
4+ Stars
Listened to Audible. Joniece Abbott-Pratt has a higher pitched voice the narrators that I am accustomed to listening, but she was excellent and it was an engaging Audible experience!
4+ Stars
Listened to Audible. Joniece Abbott-Pratt has a higher pitched voice the narrators that I am accustomed to listening, but she was excellent and it was an engaging Audible experience!
April 2, 2022
There's a jungle of sticky notes in the pages of my copy, but I'm not sure I have it in me to write a review: there's so much to unpack.
Yes, I recommend it. Please approach knowing the book should have a trigger warning for discussion of sexual assault and rape, which was necessary but is still confronting reading.
Yes, I recommend it. Please approach knowing the book should have a trigger warning for discussion of sexual assault and rape, which was necessary but is still confronting reading.
January 5, 2022
I didn’t know this going in, but this book is 95% about race and politics as experienced and perceived by the author than about physics or astronomy. I picked it up because it was on a couple “best science books of 2021” lists.
I agree with most of her points about racism and sexism, and clearly STEM fields are some of the most pernicious in this regard with their dismissal of minorities and women (see my review of The Geography of Genius: A Search for the World's Most Creative Places from Ancient Athens to Silicon Valley here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...).
All in all probably a needed wake-up call for many who are unaware of the sinister side of the physics game and how it feeds into a system that is racist to its foundation.
I agree with most of her points about racism and sexism, and clearly STEM fields are some of the most pernicious in this regard with their dismissal of minorities and women (see my review of The Geography of Genius: A Search for the World's Most Creative Places from Ancient Athens to Silicon Valley here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...).
All in all probably a needed wake-up call for many who are unaware of the sinister side of the physics game and how it feeds into a system that is racist to its foundation.
March 21, 2021
3/12/2021 3.5 stars for the back half, 2.5 for the dire front. Full review tk at TheFrumiousConsortium.net.
3/12/2021 I want to like popular science, and am always pleasantly surprised on the rare occasions I do. I think that, to a large extent, my reading habits in this have been shaped by being a good textbook student. When I'm presented with nonfiction, I like to have things laid out to me systematically (as good textbooks will do!) in bite-sized pieces, layered on to one another. In college, I developed an interest in quantum physics, but since my college didn't offer those classes, I borrowed library textbooks on the subject (idk why my school had them, considering) and thoroughly enjoyed those. Physics, in general, was my favorite science, from high school and beyond.
So it's always been weird to me that I'd pick up seminal pop science texts from Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan and the like and be, frankly, bored. I'd read the first chapter or two and just find myself utterly mystified and annoyed. So Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is in good company when I say that I found the first 4-6 chapters of her book a struggle. As she herself admits later on in The Disordered Cosmos, writing about science for a lay audience is hard. She's got a ton of enthusiasm and a ton of knowledge, but trying to break that down into pieces for readers who don't have at least a working knowledge of the subject is a tough task, and one I don't feel she accomplishes. But this isn't meant to be a textbook -- and that's a good thing, because I had occasional quibbles with her scientific philosophies, which at one point directly contradict themselves (more on that further down.) What it is meant to be is an exploration of what it's like to be a minority in a supposedly highly rational field, and to be continually confronted with all the ways this so-called rationality is really just systemic white supremacy.
The back 60% of the book is essentially a sociology of science text, and is really engaging and brutally frank as Dr Prescod-Weinstein discusses her experiences as a Black Jewish agender queer woman in the field of particle physics. She talks about race and radical politics, solidarity with labor and Indigenous peoples, rape and sexism, and her hopes for a society that encourages everyone to learn -- and not just by providing aspirational models but by actually giving people the security with which to choose the pursuit of knowledge instead of needing to divert all that energy into mere survival -- with both fire and finesse. Reading TDC makes you wonder why her politics are considered radical when anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that they embody doing the right thing for humanity in general. "But who's going to pay for it?" moan the trolls and the ignorant and the entrenched interests. Well, once we properly tax the rich and stop letting the military-industrial complex use our tax dollars as their fun money stashes, we'll be in a good position to fix the fraying social net that's barely supporting America, thereby launching entire generations into scholarship, if that's what they choose to do.
That is, however, another of the weaknesses of this book, that it is very American -- understandable tho given that therein lies the bulk of Dr Prescod-Weinstein's experience. It's just weird that she complains about cultural imperialism but defaults to assuming that America is the center of the world, in line with several other inconsistencies that haven't yet been ironed out in her thinking, e.g the difference between scientific fact and the assigning of moral value to them in re: the field of optics; or the complaint that the pursuit of knowledge needs to justify itself (for funding etc.) vs the insistence that science needs to tie itself to social issues. I get what she's trying to say, but I wish she'd done it more clearly so that I'm not left doubtful in assuming that she and I actually are on the same page.
Anyway, TDC is fine for pop science (I guess) but it's really great as a critique of the way contemporary American science -- and by extension, contemporary American society -- treats people who aren't able-bodied straight white males. Skim the first few chapters to get to the really good stuff, tho.
The Disordered Cosmos: A Journey Into Dark Matter, Spacetime, And Dreams Deferred by Chanda Prescod-Weinstein was published March 9, 2021 by Bold Type Books and is available from all good booksellers, including Bookshop! Want it now? For the Kindle version, click here.
3/12/2021 I want to like popular science, and am always pleasantly surprised on the rare occasions I do. I think that, to a large extent, my reading habits in this have been shaped by being a good textbook student. When I'm presented with nonfiction, I like to have things laid out to me systematically (as good textbooks will do!) in bite-sized pieces, layered on to one another. In college, I developed an interest in quantum physics, but since my college didn't offer those classes, I borrowed library textbooks on the subject (idk why my school had them, considering) and thoroughly enjoyed those. Physics, in general, was my favorite science, from high school and beyond.
So it's always been weird to me that I'd pick up seminal pop science texts from Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan and the like and be, frankly, bored. I'd read the first chapter or two and just find myself utterly mystified and annoyed. So Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is in good company when I say that I found the first 4-6 chapters of her book a struggle. As she herself admits later on in The Disordered Cosmos, writing about science for a lay audience is hard. She's got a ton of enthusiasm and a ton of knowledge, but trying to break that down into pieces for readers who don't have at least a working knowledge of the subject is a tough task, and one I don't feel she accomplishes. But this isn't meant to be a textbook -- and that's a good thing, because I had occasional quibbles with her scientific philosophies, which at one point directly contradict themselves (more on that further down.) What it is meant to be is an exploration of what it's like to be a minority in a supposedly highly rational field, and to be continually confronted with all the ways this so-called rationality is really just systemic white supremacy.
The back 60% of the book is essentially a sociology of science text, and is really engaging and brutally frank as Dr Prescod-Weinstein discusses her experiences as a Black Jewish agender queer woman in the field of particle physics. She talks about race and radical politics, solidarity with labor and Indigenous peoples, rape and sexism, and her hopes for a society that encourages everyone to learn -- and not just by providing aspirational models but by actually giving people the security with which to choose the pursuit of knowledge instead of needing to divert all that energy into mere survival -- with both fire and finesse. Reading TDC makes you wonder why her politics are considered radical when anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that they embody doing the right thing for humanity in general. "But who's going to pay for it?" moan the trolls and the ignorant and the entrenched interests. Well, once we properly tax the rich and stop letting the military-industrial complex use our tax dollars as their fun money stashes, we'll be in a good position to fix the fraying social net that's barely supporting America, thereby launching entire generations into scholarship, if that's what they choose to do.
That is, however, another of the weaknesses of this book, that it is very American -- understandable tho given that therein lies the bulk of Dr Prescod-Weinstein's experience. It's just weird that she complains about cultural imperialism but defaults to assuming that America is the center of the world, in line with several other inconsistencies that haven't yet been ironed out in her thinking, e.g the difference between scientific fact and the assigning of moral value to them in re: the field of optics; or the complaint that the pursuit of knowledge needs to justify itself (for funding etc.) vs the insistence that science needs to tie itself to social issues. I get what she's trying to say, but I wish she'd done it more clearly so that I'm not left doubtful in assuming that she and I actually are on the same page.
Anyway, TDC is fine for pop science (I guess) but it's really great as a critique of the way contemporary American science -- and by extension, contemporary American society -- treats people who aren't able-bodied straight white males. Skim the first few chapters to get to the really good stuff, tho.
The Disordered Cosmos: A Journey Into Dark Matter, Spacetime, And Dreams Deferred by Chanda Prescod-Weinstein was published March 9, 2021 by Bold Type Books and is available from all good booksellers, including Bookshop! Want it now? For the Kindle version, click here.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 682 reviews