Critical Evaluation of Studies Alleging Evidence for Technosignatures in the POSS1-E Photographic Plates

Abstract

Recent studies by B. Villarroel et al. have assembled and analysed datasets of unidentified features measured from digital scans of pre-Sputnik photographic plates. We have examined the claims in these papers using two previously published datasets that are closely related to those used in the Villarroel et al. studies. For these datasets, the assumption of a spatially uniform-random background distribution of features, essential to the Earth shadow analysis, is shown to be false. After finding the null distribution of feature count deviations from the background, we find no statistically significant deficit in the shadow. We find that the reported correlation between the timing of feature observations and nuclear tests becomes insignificant after properly normalizing by the relevant number of observation days, and is almost completely determined by the observation schedule of the Palomar telescope. We uncover important inconsistencies in the definitions of the datasets used in these studies, as well as the use of unvalidated datasets containing catalogue stars, scan artefacts, and plate defects. We find an overall gradual increase in number density of features toward the corners and edges of plates, as well as examples of (i) empty north-south strips that span multiple plates; (ii) clusters and voids having geometric shapes; and (iii) amorphous clusters. We also highlight a circular argument used in these studies, that leverages the results of an inferential analysis to justify conclusions about the origin of the features as well as the validity of the measurements. Finally, we also review the literature concerning historical searches for optical transients in photographic plates corresponding to gamma ray bursts (GRBs); following decades of work, researchers were unable to make a confident identification of a GRB-associated optical transient.