13 ms·

I think some posters here are missing that Caballero isn't trying to prove anything, they just made a few assumptions (if it was created by intelligent life, th

I think some posters here are missing that Caballero isn't trying to prove anything, they just made a few assumptions (if it was created by intelligent life, then...), looked for something that matched those assumptions, and selected a candidate star system for further consideration. I don't see anywhere that they are claiming this is in any way evidence for the assertion that the Wow! signal originated by intelligent life.

ordu 6y ago
Yeah. It is a problem of allocating scarce resources: which exoplanets to study first? How could one answer, except using any probabilistic evidence here is. Anything resistant to explanation by 'mundane' phenomena but might be explained by an phenomenon Caballero is trying to find, is a good probabilistic evidence that could be used to narrow searching space.
monkpit 6y ago
I think part of the issue is that the title is a bit clickbait-y. Sure, it’s technically a correct title, but at first glance it seems much more interesting than it actually is.
- dnautics 6y ago
  How would you fix it? "Astronomer finds an exoplanet which fits exclusion criteria if WOW! Signal is intelligent in origin"?
  - billforsternz 6y ago
    I would fix it by not printing it at all because it's a click bait title with no substantial underlying story.
  - privong 6y ago
    > How would you fix it? "Astronomer finds an exoplanet which fits exclusion criteria if WOW! Signal is intelligent in origin"? As far as I can tell there's not even evidence of an exoplanet around that star (likely because that star hasn't been searched for evidence of an exoplanet). The arXiv preprint basically amounts to "Identification of a Sun-like star in the same part of the sky where the 'Wow' signal originated."
    - Beldin 6y ago
      > "Identification of a Sun-like star in the same part of the sky where the 'Wow' signal originated." Even that is clickbaity - it fails to account how likely it was to find such a star in that volume of space. That would at least offer some analysis of the situation.
      - privong 6y ago
        > Even that is clickbaity - it fails to account how likely it was to find such a star in that volume of space. Yeah. I should've been more clear that I was only meaning that as a summary of the article, not as a replacement title.

ordu 6y ago

Yeah. It is a problem of allocating scarce resources: which exoplanets to study first? How could one answer, except using any probabilistic evidence here is. Anything resistant to explanation by 'mundane' phenomena but might be explained by an phenomenon Caballero is trying to find, is a good probabilistic evidence that could be used to narrow searching space.

monkpit 6y ago

I think part of the issue is that the title is a bit clickbait-y. Sure, it’s technically a correct title, but at first glance it seems much more interesting than it actually is.

dnautics 6y ago
How would you fix it? "Astronomer finds an exoplanet which fits exclusion criteria if WOW! Signal is intelligent in origin"?
- billforsternz 6y ago
  I would fix it by not printing it at all because it's a click bait title with no substantial underlying story.
- privong 6y ago
  > How would you fix it? "Astronomer finds an exoplanet which fits exclusion criteria if WOW! Signal is intelligent in origin"? As far as I can tell there's not even evidence of an exoplanet around that star (likely because that star hasn't been searched for evidence of an exoplanet). The arXiv preprint basically amounts to "Identification of a Sun-like star in the same part of the sky where the 'Wow' signal originated."
  - Beldin 6y ago
    > "Identification of a Sun-like star in the same part of the sky where the 'Wow' signal originated." Even that is clickbaity - it fails to account how likely it was to find such a star in that volume of space. That would at least offer some analysis of the situation.
    - privong 6y ago
      > Even that is clickbaity - it fails to account how likely it was to find such a star in that volume of space. Yeah. I should've been more clear that I was only meaning that as a summary of the article, not as a replacement title.