Why is this move "Brilliant"?

I'm wondering why the engine rates this move as "brilliant".

I understand what brilliant means and when the engine classifies a move as brilliant. I want to know why this move in particular was so good in the eyes of the engine.

I don't think the engine rates moves as brilliant relative to the other possible moves

Well, what does the analysis tell you? Don't you get any of the computer analysis?  It shows you why it thinks it is brilliant.

Surely you, who played it, can understand the complex interplay.

No. My very next move was a mistake. I'm rated 1300 blitz.

It's not brilliant. 

It is in fact...

It's necessarily not "brilliant" but it's a decent move. 

My question is why does the engine say it's brilliant? I would think an engine, which can think far far deeper than any human is capable of would not give a nonsense rating.

I was wondering the same thing, I'm a beginner and I've only made one brilliant move that I've analyzed, so I'm probably not the best person to answer the question, but I read somewhere on this site that it means it's a great move that is also hard very to find. And I'm paraphrasing because i can't find where i read it.

So i'm guessing it's equivalent to a best move but the computer considers it difficult for a person to see and play it.

You are correct. It says this when you hover over "brilliant move" in an analysis.

That's complete nonsense. Put this position in front of 100 masters--not IMs or GMs--and at least 90 of them will play Rxf7,  If the word "brilliant" means anything, it doesn't mean the routine choice of most strong players. It's a very strong move, but it's not that hard to find either

I don't care about your 100 masters. The engine said this move was "brilliant". I'm not asking for personal opinions about the move; I'm asking why the engine said the move was "brilliant".

Obviously the analysis is not saying this move is "brilliant" for no good reason. There must be something to it. Obviously. The engine is smarter at chess than any human ever. Even you.

"Brilliant" is just an arbitrary valuation put in by the programmers. It's almost surely based on the numeric difference between the "brilliant" move and any alternatives. The engine doesn't know or care about "brilliance," it cares about arithmetic

""Brilliant" is just an arbitrary valuation put in by the programmers." Arbitrary? No. Definitely not.

"it cares about arithmetic" not even close?

"It's almost surely based on the numeric difference between the "brilliant" move and any alternatives." If this were the case then "brilliant" moves would be extremely common in situations in which moves are almost forced. This is clearly untrue.

Pointless to argue.  The idea that a chess engine has some kind of aesthetic notion of "brilliancy" is so ludicrous that there's not much to argue about. But if the word "brilliant" means anything at all, it can't mean "the first move any strong player would look at" 

You should message the developers to report this bug! You clearly know a lot about computers and chess. I bet you can crush Grandmasters easily.

"But that's the only reasonable move."

Exactly!

I was under the impression that the engine awards the "brilliant" label if it took it a long time (large depth) to realize that this is indeed a good move. Kind of "it took me long to see that this move is good so you must be brilliant". That being said, I do not see why this move would qualify.