Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34155109›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021

Formulation and resolutions of the red sky paradox.

David Kipping

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

David KippingDepartment of Astronomy, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 d.kipping@columbia.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4365-7366

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most stars in the Universe are red dwarfs. They outnumber stars like our Sun by a factor of 5 and outlive them by another factor of 20 (population-weighted mean). When combined with recent observations uncovering an abundance of temperate, rocky planets around these diminutive stars, we are faced with an apparent logical contradiction-Why do we not see a red dwarf in our sky? To address this "red sky paradox," we formulate a Bayesian probability function concerning the odds of finding oneself around an F/G/K-spectral type (Sun-like) star. If the development of intelligent life from prebiotic chemistry is a universally rapid and ensured process, the temporal advantage of red dwarfs dissolves, softening the red sky paradox, but exacerbating the classic Fermi paradox. Otherwise, we find that humanity appears to be a 1-in-100 outlier. While this could be random chance (resolution I), we outline three other nonmutually exclusive resolutions (II to IV) that broadly act as filters to attenuate the suitability of red dwarfs for complex life. Future observations may be able to provide support for some of these. Notably, if surveys reveal a paucity of temperate rocky planets around the smallest (and most numerous) red dwarfs, then this would support resolution II. As another example, if future characterization efforts were to find that red dwarf worlds have limited windows for complex life due to stellar evolution, this would support resolution III. Solving this paradox would reveal guidance for the targeting of future remote life sensing experiments and the limits of life in the cosmos.

Indexed as

astrobiologyBayesian statisticsorigin of life

Identifiers

PMID34155109
PMCPMC8255952

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.