You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Nate646 comments on [Link]: KIC 8462852, aka WTF star, "the most mysterious star in our galaxy", ETI candidate, etc. - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: jacob_cannell 20 October 2015 01:10AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (43)

Comments (43)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Nate646 20 October 2015 06:05:37AM 7 points [-]

*What's the probability that this is caused by aliens? *

What is your own probability estimate? I am not sure I can accurately distinguish between below 1/100,000 and between 1/10,000 and 1/100,000. With probabilities this small I am not sure that any estimate is useful

Comment author: MarsColony_in10years 20 October 2015 05:31:50PM 4 points [-]

Another way of saying "below 1/100,000 chance of aliens" is "above 99.999% chance of natural causes". That seams awefully certain of the unlikelyness of aliens. I'm pretty sure it's not aliens, but I'm not that confident. I'd happily lose a dollar in that bet, if someone wanted to wager $100,000 against it.

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 20 October 2015 12:07:56PM 2 points [-]

it would tell you how much more evidence you would need to begin taking it seriously. That said, agree that it's not very useful.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit