Life detection in a universe of false positives

Astrobiology aims to determine the distribution and diversity of life in the universe. But as the word "biosignature" suggests, what will be detected is not life itself, but an observation implicating living systems. Our limited access to other worlds suggests this observation is more likely to reflect out-of-equilibrium gasses than a writhing octopus. Yet, anything short of a writhing octopus will raise skepticism about what has been detected. Resolving that skepticism requires a theory to delineate processes due to life and those due to abiotic mechanisms. This poses an existential question for life detection: How do astrobiologists plan to detect life on exoplanets via features shared between non-living and living systems? We argue that you cannot without an underlying theory of life. We illustrate this by analyzing the hypothetical detection of an "Earth 2.0" exoplanet. Without a theory of life, we argue the community should focus on identifying unambiguous features of life via four areas: examining life on Earth, building life in the lab, probing the solar system, and searching for technosignatures. Ultimately, we ask, what exactly do astrobiologists hope to learn by searching for life? The ultimate goal of astrobiology is to determine the distribution and diversity of life in the universe. But there's a big problem: Most of the planets in our universe are outside our reach. For these exoplanets, can we really ever be certain if they contain life or not? Absent a theory of life, and going beyond mere anomaly detection, we advocate focusing on unambiguous features of life with no known false positives.image