This market resolves YES if there is a public, credible scientific consensus that Tabby’s Star (KIC 8462852) hosts or is surrounded by a Dyson-like megastructure, or technosignature indicative of intelligent extraterrestrial engineering.
A Dyson-like megastructure refers to artificial structures or swarms built by an advanced civilization to capture or manipulate stellar energy (e.g., a Dyson swarm, shell, ring, or similar energy-harvesting construct). The structure must not be natural (e.g., dust clouds, comets, intrinsic stellar variation), and must be reasonably interpreted as artificial based on public scientific evidence.
Resolution Criteria (YES)
This market resolves YES if both of the following conditions are met:
Public Scientific Claim
There is a public announcement, publication, or formal declaration from a credible scientific source affirming that the most plausible explanation for Tabby’s Star’s observed anomalies involves an artificial megastructure or technosignature, such as:
A Dyson swarm or shell partially obscuring the star’s light,
An array of orbiting energy collectors or infrastructure not consistent with known natural phenomena,
Emission or occlusion patterns consistent with deliberate design or intelligent manipulation.
Accepted sources include:
Peer-reviewed journals (e.g. Nature, Science, The Astrophysical Journal),
Official press releases from reputable institutions (e.g. NASA, SETI Institute, ESO, leading universities),
Reports from internationally recognized SETI or technosignature research teams.
Media & Scientific Consensus
The above claim must receive corroborating coverage or acknowledgement from at least two of the following:
Prominent science communication outlets (e.g. Scientific American, New Scientist, MIT Technology Review),
Major mainstream media (e.g. New York Times, BBC, Reuters, The Guardian),
Statements by independent astronomers or astrophysicists affirming that the artificial megastructure hypothesis is now the leading explanation or cannot be reasonably ruled out.
The evidence must indicate that the explanation is intentional, engineered, and non-natural in origin.
1,000