Just submitted another paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.22896

This was a fun one. Astronomers want to know how much life there is in the universe, but we don’t really know. It could be rare or common, or maybe Earth is the only case. But it is possible to look at things about the Earth’s situation and try to use that to tell us something about life more broadly. Most people think you can get a little bit of information that way, but not a lot (that is indeed the case).

One problem is that nobody really knows how to analyse the data. It’s a bit weird because we can only think about this because we exist, so we are possibly in an unusual place as far as the universe is concerned – one where it is possible to be living and thinking about this. There’s a term that gets thrown around called the “anthropic principle” to do with this idea.

Anyway, an astronomer, David Kipping, says that because we live around a G type star, but there are more M type stars (red ones) in the universe, that provides some evidence that it is harder for life to exist around M type stars. I wanted to work that out formally using ideas from a paper by Radford Neal (statisticians will know him) that I read during my PhD. Originally I thought I would love Neal’s method and use it to disprove Kipping’s argument.

I tried applying Neal’s idea but it kept giving weird answers that seemed obviously wrong to me. Over months I convinced myself that Neal’s method was actually incorrect. I think it got a few things right but was missing a factor that had to be there to give correct answers. We modified it and came up with a method that I now believe is correct and gives sensible answers on a variety of problems. And by the way it confirms Kipping’s argument. There is some evidence, from the fact the sun is type G, that it is easier for life to exist around type G. There might still be some life around M stars, but it wouldn’t be the overwhelming majority that you might expect just by counting the stars.
Interestingly, people who actually study M stars have already worked out that physically they might be more hostile to life. So the navel-gazing evidence of our own circumstances points in the same direction as the stellar astrophysics.

Brendon said:

Just submitted another paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.22896

This was a fun one. Astronomers want to know how much life there is in the universe, but we don’t really know. It could be rare or common, or maybe Earth is the only case. But it is possible to look at things about the Earth’s situation and try to use that to tell us something about life more broadly. Most people think you can get a little bit of information that way, but not a lot (that is indeed the case).

One problem is that nobody really knows how to analyse the data. It’s a bit weird because we can only think about this because we exist, so we are possibly in an unusual place as far as the universe is concerned – one where it is possible to be living and thinking about this. There’s a term that gets thrown around called the “anthropic principle” to do with this idea.

Anyway, an astronomer, David Kipping, says that because we live around a G type star, but there are more M type stars (red ones) in the universe, that provides some evidence that it is harder for life to exist around M type stars. I wanted to work that out formally using ideas from a paper by Radford Neal (statisticians will know him) that I read during my PhD. Originally I thought I would love Neal’s method and use it to disprove Kipping’s argument.

I tried applying Neal’s idea but it kept giving weird answers that seemed obviously wrong to me. Over months I convinced myself that Neal’s method was actually incorrect. I think it got a few things right but was missing a factor that had to be there to give correct answers. We modified it and came up with a method that I now believe is correct and gives sensible answers on a variety of problems. And by the way it confirms Kipping’s argument. There is some evidence, from the fact the sun is type G, that it is easier for life to exist around type G. There might still be some life around M stars, but it wouldn’t be the overwhelming majority that you might expect just by counting the stars.
Interestingly, people who actually study M stars have already worked out that physically they might be more hostile to life. So the navel-gazing evidence of our own circumstances points in the same direction as the stellar astrophysics.

Sounds like a good addition to the knowledge pool of the possibility of extra-terrestrial life.

Thanks for posting a link to your paper. It is way out of my league. Probably Alice (Alis or Alys) in Wales is too. And, what was the name of her kindergarten teacher? Also, why does Bob have black hair?

Our Brendon????😍😀

Woodie said:

Our Brendon????😍😀

Yep.

Splendid effort, I’ll have a peep at it shortly.

Woodie said:

Our Brendon????😍😀

Apparently so.

Michael V said:

Thanks for posting a link to your paper. It is way out of my league. Probably Alice (Alis or Alys) in Wales is too. And, what was the name of her kindergarten teacher? Also, why does Bob have black hair?

:-)

Woodie said:

Our Brendon????😍😀

Yes. Hi Woodie, I hope you’re doing well.

Nice paper, and also a good general primer on BI.

Michael V said:

Woodie said:

Our Brendon????😍😀

Yep.

Way kewlies. 😎

Brendon said:

Woodie said:

Our Brendon????😍😀

Yes. Hi Woodie, I hope you’re doing well.

Ize is doin’ goodly. Retired now. A man with a dog and a trainset. 🚂

And your good self?

Woodie said:

Brendon said:

Woodie said:

Our Brendon????😍😀

Yes. Hi Woodie, I hope you’re doing well.

Ize is doin’ goodly. Retired now. A man with a dog and a trainset. 🚂

And your good self?

Also very good thanks.

Brendon said:

Just submitted another paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.22896

This was a fun one. Astronomers want to know how much life there is in the universe, but we don’t really know. It could be rare or common, or maybe Earth is the only case. But it is possible to look at things about the Earth’s situation and try to use that to tell us something about life more broadly. Most people think you can get a little bit of information that way, but not a lot (that is indeed the case).

One problem is that nobody really knows how to analyse the data. It’s a bit weird because we can only think about this because we exist, so we are possibly in an unusual place as far as the universe is concerned – one where it is possible to be living and thinking about this. There’s a term that gets thrown around called the “anthropic principle” to do with this idea.

Anyway, an astronomer, David Kipping, says that because we live around a G type star, but there are more M type stars (red ones) in the universe, that provides some evidence that it is harder for life to exist around M type stars. I wanted to work that out formally using ideas from a paper by Radford Neal (statisticians will know him) that I read during my PhD. Originally I thought I would love Neal’s method and use it to disprove Kipping’s argument.

I tried applying Neal’s idea but it kept giving weird answers that seemed obviously wrong to me. Over months I convinced myself that Neal’s method was actually incorrect. I think it got a few things right but was missing a factor that had to be there to give correct answers. We modified it and came up with a method that I now believe is correct and gives sensible answers on a variety of problems. And by the way it confirms Kipping’s argument. There is some evidence, from the fact the sun is type G, that it is easier for life to exist around type G. There might still be some life around M stars, but it wouldn’t be the overwhelming majority that you might expect just by counting the stars.
Interestingly, people who actually study M stars have already worked out that physically they might be more hostile to life. So the navel-gazing evidence of our own circumstances points in the same direction as the stellar astrophysics.

Now downloaded.

Looks interesting :)

I was going to ask if you still did stuff with Cusp, but now I don’t have to :)

I wrote more papers with Cusp than without him!

Lovely work Brendon.
The forum mummies approve.
And good to see Geraint in there too :)))

Interesting work, I’ve had a preliminary peep. Seems to add a little more formal infrastructure to the hand-waving.

One empirical avenue potentially within human grasp is of course the rest of our own solar system.

If no life is found in the underground oceans of the outer solar system, or the protected underground regions of Mars, or anywhere else we manage to search in our own system, even if conditions seem “favourable” for at least very simple microbes, that will presumably alter some of the basic assumptions.

Bubblecar said:

Interesting work, I’ve had a preliminary peep. Seems to add a little more formal infrastructure to the hand-waving.

One empirical avenue potentially within human grasp is of course the rest of our own solar system.

If no life is found in the underground oceans of the outer solar system, or the protected underground regions of Mars, or anywhere else we manage to search in our own system, even if conditions seem “favourable” for at least very simple microbes, that will presumably alter some of the basic assumptions.

Adding formal infrastructure to the handwaving is a very good summary. I agree about what we should conclude if we thoroughly explore the solar system.

Divine Angel said:

Bubblecar said:

Spiny Norman said:

Do aliens actually exist? And if there’s life somewhere else in the universe, why haven’t we found it yet? 👽🌌

In the first episode of our brand-new series, Explainer for a Stranger, world-renowned physicist Professor Brian Cox sits down with a complete stranger, Amaani, to tackle one of humanity’s biggest mysteries: are we alone in the universe?

Explainer for a Stranger brings together leading experts and curious strangers to explore some of life’s biggest questions. With no prior relationship and no questions off limits, our experts break down complex subjects into fascinating, easy-to-understand conversations, guided by the curiosity of someone who simply wants to know more.

In this episode, Brian Cox and Amaani explore the possibility of alien life, extraterrestrial intelligence and whether life exists beyond Earth. From the vastness of space and the billions of galaxies in the observable universe to the search for habitable planets, they discuss what modern astrophysics can tell us about the likelihood of discovering life elsewhere in the cosmos.

Could intelligent civilisations exist on distant planets? Why haven’t we made contact with aliens? And what would finding extraterrestrial life mean for humanity?

Join Professor Brian Cox for a fascinating conversation about space, science, astronomy, the universe and the search for alien life, as he helps Amaani explore the ultimate question: Do Aliens Actually Exist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHiGcX6S2hg

Is it the real Brian Cox or one of the AI Brian Coxes?

Pretty sure Bren just solved this for us 👍

^