I would be very sceptical of data analysis papers with Penrose's name on them. Penrose & Gurzadyan committed this travesty: https://arxiv.org/abs/1011.3706 ht

I would be very sceptical of data analysis papers with Penrose's name on them. Penrose & Gurzadyan committed this travesty: https://arxiv.org/abs/1011.3706 https://arxiv.org/abs/1011.3706 ...and the entire CMB analysis community quickly rushed to point out the numerous basic errors done in the statistical analysis. E.g. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2041-8205/733/2/L29/meta http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2041-8205/733/2/L2... Gurzadyan & Penrose wrote the kind of paper that should never have passed basic peer review. And even when "everyone" pointed out Gurzadyan does not have a clue about data analysis they still stuck to it. I have no idea about this paper and if Penrose has found a better data analyst to collaborate with this time. Just be aware that while Penrose may be brilliant about the things he knows something about, his name on a data analysis paper is not any guarantee about the data analysis being sound. Edit: Another less polite and clearer exposition of Gurzadyan's "methods" https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2012/02/aa17344-11/aa17344-11.html https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2012/02/aa17344-...