A Less Terrifying Universe? Mundanity as an Explanation for the Fermi Paradox
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
arxiv.orgResearchstory
calmneutral
Debate
0/100
Fermi ParadoxAstrobiologyCosmology
Key topics
Fermi Paradox
Astrobiology
Cosmology
A research paper proposes that the mundanity of life and the universe could be an explanation for the Fermi Paradox, sparking discussion on the implications of this idea.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
18m
Peak period
1
0-1h
Avg / period
1
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 15, 2025 at 8:28 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 15, 2025 at 8:46 AM EDT
18m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
1 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 15, 2025 at 8:46 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45591362Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 10:07:39 AM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Here the core argument fails because it assumes ALL extraterrestrial civilizations would face identical technological limits and motivational constraints -- none would build detectable megastructures, none would colonize extensively, and none would maintain beacons. This is fundamentally inconsistent with the paper's own "Copernican mediocrity principle," which predicts significant diversity in civilizational trajectories, motivations, and capabilities; if even ONE exceptional civilization exists among potentially thousands, the "mundane" explanation collapses.
Really, all it takes is one exception to the rule. Just one. A species goes crazy and creates Berserkers, and there you are. (Is our own really THAT unlikely to do this? lol.)
And, despite how it's dressed up, the paper has nothing to do with physics. It's based on sociological priors (shared "lack of desire," boredom/fear,), and the conclusion is baked into the premise.
IMO even stuff like the Planetarium hypothesis is much more likely than this. In any case you must suspend disbelief.