I don't recall this being new, when I was growing up in the 80's astronomers were citing the unstable nature of red dwarfs as a major filter in the Fermi paradox.
Why has no-one ever gone there and checked? Are they stupid?
I like how you can make whatever claims you want about life in other parts of the galaxy and no one can check you on it.
Here's why life could actually be abundant on planets close to their star: because I fuckin said so, that's why! Prove me wrong nerds!
If only we knew how light worked and could come up with some analysis that would suggest one answer over the other. Oh well, I guess you're right and physicists are just making shit up
We can quantify light but we know next to nothing about the conditions required for life to form, sample size of 1 is hardly conclusive
It is a pleasure to meet you Mr Fermi.
I personally like to believe that life is not rare because life fucking finds a way and all that.
Intelligent life is likely not rare. On our planet there are several species that might be considered intelligent like elephants, whales, dolphins, covids etc.
Intelligent, extreme tool building life at a detectable technology level from space is extremely rare. I mean seriously, humans have only been detectable from space for less than 125 years out of the 400-500 million years with large multicellular life on this planet.
We developed the ability for a global extinction event from nuclear warfare 80 years ago and we are currently on pace for a global climate catastrophe in the next 200. At the current rate we'll be lucky to be detectable from space for 200 years.
Mr Hanson too? This thread is a veritable whos who of extraterrestrial thought.
I personally like where Olev Vinn went with it.
Recently, paleobiologist Olev Vinn has suggested that the great filter may exist between steps 8 and 9 due to inherited behavior patterns (IBP) that initially occur in all intelligent biological organisms. These IBPs are incompatible with conditions prevailing in technological civilizations and could inevitably lead to the self-destruction of civilization in multiple ways.
I somewhat agree with your sentiment. We know only about life on earth and assume we are the norm. There are arguments to make that changing a few parameters will have a negative effect but we might just be a "local optimum" and have no idea what the other local optimums (or even absolute ones) look like.
Then again, we can make educated guesses and I guess the scientists know that that's what they are doing. But raising research money is easier if you claim to search for alien life.
If you look at stuff like the purple earth hypothises, the Canfield ocean, I'd definitely go with life finds a way.
I don't know either of these terms. Can you give me a tldr?
Purple earth hypothesis suggests that early photosynthesis wasn't chlorophil based, but on a simpler molecule (retinal) which is purple colored. The Canfield ocean was supposed to have followed this time yielding a turquoise life, where the ocean was anoxic and sulfidic. That was then replaced during the great oxigenation event which lead to the current green earth.
what if they start on a yellow dwarf like we are then turn the star into a red dwarf so it won't kill us?
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
