3 ms·
>Are we sure we didn't just fail to detect it? I would be interested in knowing more about the possibility of that from people who study comets. The alternati
by wallace_f 8y ago
>Are we sure we didn't just fail to detect it?
I would be interested in knowing more about the possibility of that from people who study comets.
The alternative theory is the object is an extremely thin sheet (0.3mm thick), which is what these scientists suggest as the best fit for the data. That would be a really thin slice of space rock.
- candiodari 8y agoHow about from the people who study chance ? The issue with rare events is that you can never estimate the probability curves. This has the strange result that each one looks unique, complex and very much non-random ... despite potentially being very common, simple and random. We have one example from an unknown distribution. You can always read a lot into it's exact properties ... but there's nothing to be read, because we don't have the variation on those properties. So this could have been a very common run-of-the-mill interstellar asteroid ... and it could have been an alien explorer. We don't know, and we probably won't know. Well, I guess in the second case we'll eventually realize.
- wallace_f 8y agoGood ideas. But what I meant was about the possibilities of outgas-propellent existing without them being observable.