HeyJaredChanda Prescod-Weinstein
- Indexed articles, last 90 days
- 5
- Latest publication
- Sep 8, 2026
- Outlet visibility, for New Scientist
- Top 50K sites
- Earliest in this view
- Jul 14, 2026
Latest articles
The danger of viewing the cosmos as a mirror that shows us ourselves | New Scientist (opens the original)
Read excerpt
As a science writer, I spend a lot of time worrying about how to make my words simultaneously accurate and accessible. Most of the time, that’s things like correctly explaining the concept of space-time – the idea that space and time are a single, joint phenomenon – without using any equations. This physicist is hunting for the biggest black hole in the universe In the work of cosmology, there is also the element of awe. All my training teaches me to try to awe my audience. Look at the cosmos in
Read an extract from Chanda Prescod-Weinstein's The Edge of Space-Time | New Scientist (opens the original)
Read excerpt
it is not incorrect to go back and get what you forgot We are called to go back and get the history of space-time. And who am I to argue with the ancestors? Even so, I do. Science in this society is often done for the wrong reasons, I find myself telling them. And they remind me that because it’s my job to study the origin and evolution of the universe and everything inside it, I know there is a location in space-time where the universe became transparent to light: the first place where light
'Thinking about the edges of space-time can help build a better world' | New Scientist (opens the original)
Read excerpt
If I could go back in time and tell my younger self something about life as a theoretical physicist, I might say: mind the gap between what’s exciting about physics and what the job actually is. My new book, The Edge of Space-Time, was born in part out of thinking about the physical questions that get pushed to the margins in professional physics. Big-picture questions like, what is the material nature of space? What is a quantum theory of time? It is very difficult to build a professional life
Could we eliminate any particles from the standard model of physics? | New Scientist (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Have you ever wondered whether we strictly need all of the particles in the standard model of particle physics? If I were making a fundamental particle ingredients list for the most common forms of visible matter in the universe, I’d say we primarily need electrons, up quarks and down quarks. But this list completely ignores important elements of how matter works: how it sticks together, what happens when it gains or loses energy and whether particle identities are stable. The weirdness of neutr
Do we owe our existence to weird ‘virtual’ particles? (opens the original)
Read excerpt
When considering what makes up a human body, a physicist drills down beyond the atomic level. Columnist Chanda Prescod-Weinstein explores the not-exactly-real particles that allow the stuff we’re made of to hang together
Publishing over time
Last 90 days. Choose a month to open its work.
Recurring subjects
Named in the text we hold. One piece can cover several.
Audience
Top 50K sites
For New Scientist, the outlet · Measured Aug 1, 2026
Website popularity band, not a count of readers or article views.
About this data
Counts cover the work we have indexed. Tone needs enough text and a confident classification. Excerpts and episode notes are not full articles or transcripts.
Identity or attribution wrong? Suggest a correction.