So I'm pretty sure we all know that S.E.T.I. has been searching for some sign of extraterrestrial intelligence for a few decades now. I know that the current head of SETI believes (or at least he promotes the belief) that if we're going to find a signal that we'll do so sometime in the next 20 years. Is passively listening enough?
There are advocates that believe we should be doing more. They say we should actively seek contact by sending instead of just listening. Whaddya think?
I'm sure there are some rubes who'd be concerned that if we did so, it would be like ringing the dinner bell.
I think the biggest issue I'd have with doing this sort of thing is that I'd tend to think the money would be better spent scanning a wider range of frequencies from a broader set of sources than the crappy funding that SETI receives allows them to do currently.
Plus we wouldn't know if anybody heard us for how long? A lifetime possibly? Doesn't make much sense to me. If there is a technological civilization out there somewhere, then a truly comprehensive search (1,000,000 times more than we're currently doing) should be able to find some evidence of it just by listening.
I don't believe we could probably ever have any truly useful communication with any "civilization(s)" that we may or may not find but that I support the search for no other reason than the pure joy of such a discovery.
So ... Passive > Active .... IMHO.
Personally, I think we'd be better off putting the majority of money we currently spend on exploration into the Terrestrial Planet Finder program but that's a whole nuther thread.
IMHO,
Their not there. If they were they would have found us by now.
I'm sure that someone here could crunch the numbers and come up with the probability of this.
The universe is ~13. something billion years old. Our rock is what 3.5 million. and of course there are many planets that are much younger than ours. by now either we would have found them or they would have found us.
And I think that the odds are better in favor of them finding us based on how much older the universe is compared to us. After all as old as we are we have only been looking for about what 50 or so years?
Their not there. If they were they would have found us by now.
I'm sure that someone here could crunch the numbers and come up with the probability of this.
The universe is ~13. something billion years old. Our rock is what 3.5 million. and of course there are many planets that are much younger than ours. by now either we would have found them or they would have found us.
And I think that the odds are better in favor of them finding us based on how much older the universe is compared to us. After all as old as we are we have only been looking for about what 50 or so years? QUOTE (paul h+Jan 1 2008, 12:26 PM)
IMHO,
Their not there. If they were they would have found us by now.
I'm sure that someone here could crunch the numbers and come up with the probability of this.
The universe is ~13. something billion years old. Our rock is what 3.5 million. and of course there are many planets that are much younger than ours. by now either we would have found them or they would have found us. And I think that the odds are better in favor of them finding us based on how much older the universe is compared to us. After all as old as we are we have only been looking for about what 50 or so years?
To me what you're saying means that we've only been generating signals (if "they" were out there looking) for lets say 100 years just to round it nicely. Travelling at the speed of light means those signals have reached around 300 other main sequence stars. Not very many.
Of course one big issue in listening or sending is timing. Whether or not another civilization is sending and/or listening at the same (relative) time as us is a factor in Drake's Equation* (the equation generally used to crunch the numbers for probability). The other factor affecting success is how long a technological civilization can actually exist without killing itself off somehow. 500 years? 10,000 years? A million? And whether that will be coincidental with our technological existence.
That's why to be successful I'd think the broadest possible number of sources should be looked at with the widest possible range of frequencies. To me it makes no difference if we locate somebody 62 light years away or 32,758 light years away. But if we aren't looking at those distant sources (and we're not) then we won't find anything. Of course there's the problem that the further out you look the more sources there are ... lol. It isn't any easy challenge.
*Drake's Equation
N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL
where
N*= Number of stars in the Milky Way
fp = fraction of stars with planets
ne = number of planets around a star capable of sustaining life
fl = the fraction of those (ne) planets that evolve life
fi = the fraction of those where intelligent life evolves
fc = the fraction of those that are capable of communication
fl = the fraction of planets life during which a commicating civilization exists
This link has a calculator at the bottom of the page where you can plug in your own guesses.
Their not there. If they were they would have found us by now.
I'm sure that someone here could crunch the numbers and come up with the probability of this.
The universe is ~13. something billion years old. Our rock is what 3.5 million. and of course there are many planets that are much younger than ours. by now either we would have found them or they would have found us.
And I think that the odds are better in favor of them finding us based on how much older the universe is compared to us. After all as old as we are we have only been looking for about what 50 or so years? To me what you're saying means that we've only been generating signals (if "they" were out there looking) for lets say 100 years just to round it nicely. Travelling at the speed of light means those signals have reached around 300 other main sequence stars. Not very many.
Of course one big issue in listening or sending is timing. Whether or not another civilization is sending and/or listening at the same (relative) time as us is a factor in Drake's Equation* (the equation generally used to crunch the numbers for probability). The other factor affecting success is how long a technological civilization can actually exist without killing itself off somehow. 500 years? 10,000 years? A million? And whether that will be coincidental with our technological existence.
That's why to be successful I'd think the broadest possible number of sources should be looked at with the widest possible range of frequencies. To me it makes no difference if we locate somebody 62 light years away or 32,758 light years away. But if we aren't looking at those distant sources (and we're not) then we won't find anything. Of course there's the problem that the further out you look the more sources there are ... lol. It isn't any easy challenge.
*Drake's Equation
N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL
where
N*= Number of stars in the Milky Way
fp = fraction of stars with planets
ne = number of planets around a star capable of sustaining life
fl = the fraction of those (ne) planets that evolve life
fi = the fraction of those where intelligent life evolves
fc = the fraction of those that are capable of communication
fl = the fraction of planets life during which a commicating civilization exists
This link has a calculator at the bottom of the page where you can plug in your own guesses.
uaafanblog
I think it is the last three fractions(intelligence, technology, lifetime of tech society) that mean we will probably never see another civilization. In fact, I think he left out one more term that makes it nearly impossible(not that they exist, but that we would become aware of them) and that is the time it takes for signals to move between them and us. Even given identical timelines between two civilizations we would only be aware of those within a 300 light year sphere, there could be many thousands in our own Galaxy, yet it will be thousands of years before detection(again, assuming parallel timelines, shorter if they are ahead of us), and thousands more before return contact.
I think all our resources should go toward getting substantial portions of our people into space asap. Permanent populations spread throughout the Solar System would protect our species from everything short of a Hypernova, and would go a long way toward surviving even that. Once the unlimited resources of the Solar System are within our grasp, there is no limit to what we could accomplish.
Grumpy
I think it is the last three fractions(intelligence, technology, lifetime of tech society) that mean we will probably never see another civilization. In fact, I think he left out one more term that makes it nearly impossible(not that they exist, but that we would become aware of them) and that is the time it takes for signals to move between them and us. Even given identical timelines between two civilizations we would only be aware of those within a 300 light year sphere, there could be many thousands in our own Galaxy, yet it will be thousands of years before detection(again, assuming parallel timelines, shorter if they are ahead of us), and thousands more before return contact.
I think all our resources should go toward getting substantial portions of our people into space asap. Permanent populations spread throughout the Solar System would protect our species from everything short of a Hypernova, and would go a long way toward surviving even that. Once the unlimited resources of the Solar System are within our grasp, there is no limit to what we could accomplish.
Grumpy
QUOTE (uaafanblog+Jan 1 2008, 10:48 AM)
So I'm pretty sure we all know that S.E.T.I. has been searching for some sign of extraterrestrial intelligence for a few decades now. I know that the current head of SETI believes (or at least he promotes the belief) that if we're going to find a signal that we'll do so sometime in the next 20 years. Is passively listening enough?
There are advocates that believe we should be doing more. They say we should actively seek contact by sending instead of just listening. Whaddya think?
I'm sure there are some rubes who'd be concerned that if we did so, it would be like ringing the dinner bell.
I think the biggest issue I'd have with doing this sort of thing is that I'd tend to think the money would be better spent scanning a wider range of frequencies from a broader set of sources than the crappy funding that SETI receives allows them to do currently.
Plus we wouldn't know if anybody heard us for how long? A lifetime possibly? Doesn't make much sense to me. If there is a technological civilization out there somewhere, then a truly comprehensive search (1,000,000 times more than we're currently doing) should be able to find some evidence of it just by listening.
I don't believe we could probably ever have any truly useful communication with any "civilization(s)" that we may or may not find but that I support the search for no other reason than the pure joy of such a discovery.
So ... Passive > Active .... IMHO.
Personally, I think we'd be better off putting the majority of money we currently spend on exploration into the Terrestrial Planet Finder program but that's a whole nuther thread.
Everyone knows there are roughly 12 Earth like planets circulating the outside edge of our galaxy. They are located in a relatively, calm habitable zone located, about 2/3 from the center of our galaxy +/- 15%.
Future astronomers call these dozen Earth like planets, 'the string of pearls.' The two nearest Earth like planets are 50 to 100 light years from us which is a bit unusual considering the rest are far more spaced out! Some orbits are 'slightly' eccentric and out of the norm.
Okay, the above is my own work of science fiction.
No, seriously. Our receivers are not yet sensitive enough to extend far enough into space. There is a 'isotropic sphere', of which limits how far away we can hear a weak signal. It's a virtual sphere of coverage area limited by physics, thermal noise and our current technology.
There is a lot of volume in space to hide and not be seen. A neighbor could live 50 to 100 light years and we would not see or detect them right now. Nobody alive on this Earth right or immediate future generations will ever come close to seeing us find E.T.
There are advocates that believe we should be doing more. They say we should actively seek contact by sending instead of just listening. Whaddya think?
I'm sure there are some rubes who'd be concerned that if we did so, it would be like ringing the dinner bell.
I think the biggest issue I'd have with doing this sort of thing is that I'd tend to think the money would be better spent scanning a wider range of frequencies from a broader set of sources than the crappy funding that SETI receives allows them to do currently.
Plus we wouldn't know if anybody heard us for how long? A lifetime possibly? Doesn't make much sense to me. If there is a technological civilization out there somewhere, then a truly comprehensive search (1,000,000 times more than we're currently doing) should be able to find some evidence of it just by listening.
I don't believe we could probably ever have any truly useful communication with any "civilization(s)" that we may or may not find but that I support the search for no other reason than the pure joy of such a discovery.
So ... Passive > Active .... IMHO.
Personally, I think we'd be better off putting the majority of money we currently spend on exploration into the Terrestrial Planet Finder program but that's a whole nuther thread.
Everyone knows there are roughly 12 Earth like planets circulating the outside edge of our galaxy. They are located in a relatively, calm habitable zone located, about 2/3 from the center of our galaxy +/- 15%.
Future astronomers call these dozen Earth like planets, 'the string of pearls.' The two nearest Earth like planets are 50 to 100 light years from us which is a bit unusual considering the rest are far more spaced out! Some orbits are 'slightly' eccentric and out of the norm.
Okay, the above is my own work of science fiction.
No, seriously. Our receivers are not yet sensitive enough to extend far enough into space. There is a 'isotropic sphere', of which limits how far away we can hear a weak signal. It's a virtual sphere of coverage area limited by physics, thermal noise and our current technology.
There is a lot of volume in space to hide and not be seen. A neighbor could live 50 to 100 light years and we would not see or detect them right now. Nobody alive on this Earth right or immediate future generations will ever come close to seeing us find E.T.
"Personally, I think we'd be better off putting the majority of money we currently spend on exploration into the Terrestrial Planet Finder program but that's a whole nuther thread."
-uaafanblog
concoer
"There are advocates that believe we should be doing more. They say we should actively seek contact by sending instead of just listening. Whaddya think?"
-uaafanblog
we couurntly have 2 probes carrying information about our planet leaving the solar system in eccess of 1,000 miles an hour.... that's pretty much the extent of what we do.... for now
"Their not there. If they were they would have found us by now. "
-paul h
who's to say they havn't allready found us, and they're watching and waiting for the right moment to drop in.
"Everyone knows there are roughly 12 Earth like planets circulating the outside edge of our galaxy"
-rbolo30
Hooz 2 say that they cant come from another galaxy alltogether? And they're are 12 earth-like planets.... that we've discovered, there could be a great deal more that we can't see.
QUOTE (Grumpy+Jan 1 2008, 04:32 PM)
uaafanblog
I think it is the last three fractions(intelligence, technology, lifetime of tech society) that mean we will probably never see another civilization. In fact, I think he left out one more term that makes it nearly impossible(not that they exist, but that we would become aware of them) and that is the time it takes for signals to move between them and us. Even given identical timelines between two civilizations we would only be aware of those within a 300 light year sphere, there could be many thousands in our own Galaxy, yet it will be thousands of years before detection(again, assuming parallel timelines, shorter if they are ahead of us), and thousands more before return contact.
I think all our resources should go toward getting substantial portions of our people into space asap. Permanent populations spread throughout the Solar System would protect our species from everything short of a Hypernova, and would go a long way toward surviving even that. Once the unlimited resources of the Solar System are within our grasp, there is no limit to what we could accomplish.
Grumpy
I tend to think that our solar systems is full of promise for resource development but that any sort of permanent residence is likely limited to the Moon and/or Mars (because of their relative closeness to "home").
Finding an "Earth II" though presents an entirely different scenario. The primary difficult challenge will be to get to it. If we find a rocky planet where we can confirm water and oxygen within say about 50 light years; I think it is within our grasp to send a couple of (obviously long-term "generational") missions to establish ourselves in another solar system. Putting a couple of hundred humans on "Earth II" is a much better way to ensure the human legacy versus any number of encampments with how ever many people in our solar system. And yeah I know it'll probably take a few hundred years to get to something that is 50 light years away. But a separate self-supporting population is important when seemingly at any moment we could destroy ourselves by crapping in our own bed.
That isn't to say I'm against any sort of development and/or establishment of outposts on whatever bodies we can in the local area. Mars holds a lot of promise in terms of a slowly engineering it to a more livable environment but ultimately it isn't really "spreading our seed" very far is it? There is no doubt in my mind that our genes want us to spread them. It is an imperative preprogrammed into our nature. The best and most likely way to continue our genetic heritage is to spread it as wide as we possibly can. And sure ... this is all hundreds and thousands of years in the future. I have doubts that we will ever be able to reach places that are much more than 50 light years away so it will be a one step at a time thing.
As to detection of another civilization I'm hopeful that in my lifetime (another 50 years or so) I'll get to experience the joyful knowledge that there was or potentially is another species somewhere that managed to overcome their environment and rise to become self-aware and communicative. I don't care where (40 light years or 10,000) ... just that they did. Such knowledge will give my existence satisfaction and peace. With the brutality and stupidity we're capable of, the knowledge that we're not the only ones would be somehow enough for me. In some ways, I suppose it is similar to the satisfaction that those of faith have for their imagined life after death. If we find evidence that somewhere else (even if only one example) life arose and evolved then to me all is good with the universe and I don't have to be sad about my long dirt nap. Otherwise my last breath will just be a sigh of sadness.
I think it is the last three fractions(intelligence, technology, lifetime of tech society) that mean we will probably never see another civilization. In fact, I think he left out one more term that makes it nearly impossible(not that they exist, but that we would become aware of them) and that is the time it takes for signals to move between them and us. Even given identical timelines between two civilizations we would only be aware of those within a 300 light year sphere, there could be many thousands in our own Galaxy, yet it will be thousands of years before detection(again, assuming parallel timelines, shorter if they are ahead of us), and thousands more before return contact.
I think all our resources should go toward getting substantial portions of our people into space asap. Permanent populations spread throughout the Solar System would protect our species from everything short of a Hypernova, and would go a long way toward surviving even that. Once the unlimited resources of the Solar System are within our grasp, there is no limit to what we could accomplish.
Grumpy
I tend to think that our solar systems is full of promise for resource development but that any sort of permanent residence is likely limited to the Moon and/or Mars (because of their relative closeness to "home").
Finding an "Earth II" though presents an entirely different scenario. The primary difficult challenge will be to get to it. If we find a rocky planet where we can confirm water and oxygen within say about 50 light years; I think it is within our grasp to send a couple of (obviously long-term "generational") missions to establish ourselves in another solar system. Putting a couple of hundred humans on "Earth II" is a much better way to ensure the human legacy versus any number of encampments with how ever many people in our solar system. And yeah I know it'll probably take a few hundred years to get to something that is 50 light years away. But a separate self-supporting population is important when seemingly at any moment we could destroy ourselves by crapping in our own bed.
That isn't to say I'm against any sort of development and/or establishment of outposts on whatever bodies we can in the local area. Mars holds a lot of promise in terms of a slowly engineering it to a more livable environment but ultimately it isn't really "spreading our seed" very far is it? There is no doubt in my mind that our genes want us to spread them. It is an imperative preprogrammed into our nature. The best and most likely way to continue our genetic heritage is to spread it as wide as we possibly can. And sure ... this is all hundreds and thousands of years in the future. I have doubts that we will ever be able to reach places that are much more than 50 light years away so it will be a one step at a time thing.
As to detection of another civilization I'm hopeful that in my lifetime (another 50 years or so) I'll get to experience the joyful knowledge that there was or potentially is another species somewhere that managed to overcome their environment and rise to become self-aware and communicative. I don't care where (40 light years or 10,000) ... just that they did. Such knowledge will give my existence satisfaction and peace. With the brutality and stupidity we're capable of, the knowledge that we're not the only ones would be somehow enough for me. In some ways, I suppose it is similar to the satisfaction that those of faith have for their imagined life after death. If we find evidence that somewhere else (even if only one example) life arose and evolved then to me all is good with the universe and I don't have to be sad about my long dirt nap. Otherwise my last breath will just be a sigh of sadness.
uaafanblog
I know it's built in, but we must learn to think outside the gravity well. When I say we need to transport our civilization off of Earth and into the Solar System, I do not mean that we should put ourselves back at the bottom of other gravity wells like the moon or Mars, but that we should build habitats throughout the Solar System in orbits or trajectories to the Oort cloud, where the resources(both metals and CHON) are easy to get and energy is but a concentrator away. Mankind can live outside of the planets and can build our own places to live and those places can be or go anywhere we need to to get the raw materials for our advanced society. Planets could become Nature preserves, manufacturing could more easily and economically be done in orbit, if we can get a cheap way to get there. O'Neal colonies or even Dyson spheres or Ringworlds are the way of the future, exploring Mars is just a stunt, though the moon may be a source for raw materials to bootstrap ourselves into the rest of the SS.
Grumpy
I know it's built in, but we must learn to think outside the gravity well. When I say we need to transport our civilization off of Earth and into the Solar System, I do not mean that we should put ourselves back at the bottom of other gravity wells like the moon or Mars, but that we should build habitats throughout the Solar System in orbits or trajectories to the Oort cloud, where the resources(both metals and CHON) are easy to get and energy is but a concentrator away. Mankind can live outside of the planets and can build our own places to live and those places can be or go anywhere we need to to get the raw materials for our advanced society. Planets could become Nature preserves, manufacturing could more easily and economically be done in orbit, if we can get a cheap way to get there. O'Neal colonies or even Dyson spheres or Ringworlds are the way of the future, exploring Mars is just a stunt, though the moon may be a source for raw materials to bootstrap ourselves into the rest of the SS.
Grumpy
I don't think it would be wise to put the light on so to speak. If you do alert people to your existance and technological level this could be either good or bad. Doing such an act could possibly endanger earth. If ET was out there it doesn't mean he is going to be welcoming and friendly. It is much better to observe and listen first to gather information. Which is what other ET's may currently be doing with us. We wouldn't know even if they were.
But lets be honest, with all the corrupt governments and people in charge and kind of advancement through them is going to take centuries. Private investment and development is the ONLY way forward IMO.
I have this firm belief that anything is possible, you just have to find a way to get there. Its just like water flowing from the top of a mountain, it will eventually get to the bottom one way or another.
CKS
But lets be honest, with all the corrupt governments and people in charge and kind of advancement through them is going to take centuries. Private investment and development is the ONLY way forward IMO.
I have this firm belief that anything is possible, you just have to find a way to get there. Its just like water flowing from the top of a mountain, it will eventually get to the bottom one way or another.
CKS
QUOTE (Grumpy+Jan 2 2008, 12:20 PM)
uaafanblog
I know it's built in, but we must learn to think outside the gravity well. When I say we need to transport our civilization off of Earth and into the Solar System, I do not mean that we should put ourselves back at the bottom of other gravity wells like the moon or Mars, but that we should build habitats throughout the Solar System in orbits or trajectories to the Oort cloud, where the resources(both metals and CHON) are easy to get and energy is but a concentrator away. Mankind can live outside of the planets and can build our own places to live and those places can be or go anywhere we need to to get the raw materials for our advanced society. Planets could become Nature preserves, manufacturing could more easily and economically be done in orbit, if we can get a cheap way to get there. O'Neal colonies or even Dyson spheres or Ringworlds are the way of the future, exploring Mars is just a stunt, though the moon may be a source for raw materials to bootstrap ourselves into the rest of the SS.
Grumpy
And I don't mean to imply that there is anything wrong with system-wide development and settling near important resources. Those things are going to be necessary. But having lived in a place (Alaska) for 20 years where for a couple of months a year there is a distinct lack of enjoyable warm sunlight I'd tend to think that we humans can certainly survive without the sun's infrared energy we don't necessarily thrive (I don't feel this way in June though). I guess I just imagine sitting on some foreign glade basking in the light of a couple of warm new suns as a more enjoyable future as compared to a high tech (but still probably comfortable in terms of amenities) engineered environment gathering Helium-3 on Triton.
LOL. In either case of course both are likely to be generations away. Lemme ask ya this ... if tomorrow you had 10 billion dollars to spend and only two choices as to spending it would you:
Fund a comprehensive TPF mission ...
or
Complete the first phase of a permanent Lunar settlement ...
I'd guess the second choice would be yours and would agree it is a practical expenditure. But I can't help but think of the wonders that would await on some Earth II extrasolar planet and that the earlier we find "it" the sooner we can get there.
And just to keep the thread I started somewhat on topic:
I should clearly state that I really don't think anything usable or significant will come from discovering another intelligence since they'll almost certainly be so far away that we won't be able to communicate with them (barring some unforeseen gigantic quantum development that we can't yet imagine). That said, it is important to look because knowing that intelligence evolved somewhere else permanently kills god.
I know it's built in, but we must learn to think outside the gravity well. When I say we need to transport our civilization off of Earth and into the Solar System, I do not mean that we should put ourselves back at the bottom of other gravity wells like the moon or Mars, but that we should build habitats throughout the Solar System in orbits or trajectories to the Oort cloud, where the resources(both metals and CHON) are easy to get and energy is but a concentrator away. Mankind can live outside of the planets and can build our own places to live and those places can be or go anywhere we need to to get the raw materials for our advanced society. Planets could become Nature preserves, manufacturing could more easily and economically be done in orbit, if we can get a cheap way to get there. O'Neal colonies or even Dyson spheres or Ringworlds are the way of the future, exploring Mars is just a stunt, though the moon may be a source for raw materials to bootstrap ourselves into the rest of the SS.
Grumpy
And I don't mean to imply that there is anything wrong with system-wide development and settling near important resources. Those things are going to be necessary. But having lived in a place (Alaska) for 20 years where for a couple of months a year there is a distinct lack of enjoyable warm sunlight I'd tend to think that we humans can certainly survive without the sun's infrared energy we don't necessarily thrive (I don't feel this way in June though). I guess I just imagine sitting on some foreign glade basking in the light of a couple of warm new suns as a more enjoyable future as compared to a high tech (but still probably comfortable in terms of amenities) engineered environment gathering Helium-3 on Triton.
LOL. In either case of course both are likely to be generations away. Lemme ask ya this ... if tomorrow you had 10 billion dollars to spend and only two choices as to spending it would you:
Fund a comprehensive TPF mission ...
or
Complete the first phase of a permanent Lunar settlement ...
I'd guess the second choice would be yours and would agree it is a practical expenditure. But I can't help but think of the wonders that would await on some Earth II extrasolar planet and that the earlier we find "it" the sooner we can get there.
And just to keep the thread I started somewhat on topic:
I should clearly state that I really don't think anything usable or significant will come from discovering another intelligence since they'll almost certainly be so far away that we won't be able to communicate with them (barring some unforeseen gigantic quantum development that we can't yet imagine). That said, it is important to look because knowing that intelligence evolved somewhere else permanently kills god.
I'm afraid that most civilizations will conclude that it is worse to send than to receive. Sending intraglalactic messages requires enormous amounts of power, the amount of time for a reply may be longer than the lifespan of the sending civilization, the chance of of a malevolent society of superior technology receiving the message is hard to guess but scary. We might learn a lot by eavesdropping, though, without revealing our resources, our weakness, our naivete. Eventually, once we've got a better idea of the risk and opportunities, we may decide to reach out, but I don't think we're ready yet.
I realize that there have been some attempts to reach out already, but they've been weak, nothing like the concerted effort it would take to do the job right. I don't count them as an attempt to send a message.
I realize that there have been some attempts to reach out already, but they've been weak, nothing like the concerted effort it would take to do the job right. I don't count them as an attempt to send a message.
I agree that the planet search makes more sense than SETI. I think it is likely that most civilisations won't be so naive as to advertise their presence. For us to do so would be irresponsible.
Even if we were to make a serious attempt to send a signal, one that has a definite chance of being detectable lightyears away over the background from the sun, any decision on this should not be made until there is some form of world-wide government. For one country to decide to risk our entire species, in fact potentially all life on Earth, would be irresponsible.
Even if we were to make a serious attempt to send a signal, one that has a definite chance of being detectable lightyears away over the background from the sun, any decision on this should not be made until there is some form of world-wide government. For one country to decide to risk our entire species, in fact potentially all life on Earth, would be irresponsible.
Aliens must exist.
Consider this: Our Galaxy, the Milky Way has something like 200 billion stars, being 100,000 lightyears across and 10,000 lightyears thick - light years measure how far light travel in one year - light will travel around 65.5 billion miles in one year.
It takes 222 million years for our sun to orbit the galactic center. Our galaxy is one of an estimated 50 billion in the universe, where some galaxies have grouped with 12 other galaxies, whereas others have grouped in thousands! They make up 'supergalaxies', which are thought to have supermassive black holes at their centers.
Now... the universe is still expanding, and still releasing potential matter into real matter, creating more galaxies... how selfish it would be of us, to consider that in all the infinitely expanding spacetime ''we'' are the only ''Intelligent'' creatures in this great aquirium...
Consider this: Our Galaxy, the Milky Way has something like 200 billion stars, being 100,000 lightyears across and 10,000 lightyears thick - light years measure how far light travel in one year - light will travel around 65.5 billion miles in one year.
It takes 222 million years for our sun to orbit the galactic center. Our galaxy is one of an estimated 50 billion in the universe, where some galaxies have grouped with 12 other galaxies, whereas others have grouped in thousands! They make up 'supergalaxies', which are thought to have supermassive black holes at their centers.
Now... the universe is still expanding, and still releasing potential matter into real matter, creating more galaxies... how selfish it would be of us, to consider that in all the infinitely expanding spacetime ''we'' are the only ''Intelligent'' creatures in this great aquirium...
QUOTE (Grumpy+Jan 1 2008, 09:32 AM)
I think all our resources should go toward getting substantial portions of our people into space asap. Permanent populations spread throughout the Solar System would protect our species from everything short of a Hypernova, and would go a long way toward surviving even that. Once the unlimited resources of the Solar System are within our grasp, there is no limit to what we could accomplish.
Grumpy
Grumpy I didn't realize that you were so forward thinking!
QUOTE (NeoNo.1+Jan 9 2008, 03:13 PM)
Aliens must exist.
Consider this: Our Galaxy, the Milky Way has something like 200 billion stars, being 100,000 lightyears across and 10,000 lightyears thick - light years measure how far light travel in one year - light will travel around 65.5 billion miles in one year.
It takes 222 million years for our sun to orbit the galactic center. Our galaxy is one of an estimated 50 billion in the universe, where some galaxies have grouped with 12 other galaxies, whereas others have grouped in thousands! They make up 'supergalaxies', which are thought to have supermassive black holes at their centers.
Now... the universe is still expanding, and still releasing potential matter into real matter, creating more galaxies... how selfish it would be of us, to consider that in all the infinitely expanding spacetime ''we'' are the only ''Intelligent'' creatures in this great aquirium...
I agree we can't possibly be the only race of human type of creature in all the Universes everywhere. I find it disturbing when folks do not believe there are ETs...sort of arrogant isn't it?
How could we be the only or most intelligent life forms? That seems so far fetched to me. But I guess the opposite seems far fetched to many people so I don't know...
So far as getting into space, I am more of the conclusion that we did a number to ourselves already, now we need to fix it and also to accept our destiny...in a way.
That this is what we were given to work with (Earth) and this is what we need to work with. But IF they had bio-spheres in space, Space-stations for living, and they made them open to everyone, not just to the elite classes...that could be cool too. I just don't see it happening anytime soon. Maybe I'm not an optimist after all!
Consider this: Our Galaxy, the Milky Way has something like 200 billion stars, being 100,000 lightyears across and 10,000 lightyears thick - light years measure how far light travel in one year - light will travel around 65.5 billion miles in one year.
It takes 222 million years for our sun to orbit the galactic center. Our galaxy is one of an estimated 50 billion in the universe, where some galaxies have grouped with 12 other galaxies, whereas others have grouped in thousands! They make up 'supergalaxies', which are thought to have supermassive black holes at their centers.
Now... the universe is still expanding, and still releasing potential matter into real matter, creating more galaxies... how selfish it would be of us, to consider that in all the infinitely expanding spacetime ''we'' are the only ''Intelligent'' creatures in this great aquirium...
I agree we can't possibly be the only race of human type of creature in all the Universes everywhere. I find it disturbing when folks do not believe there are ETs...sort of arrogant isn't it?
How could we be the only or most intelligent life forms? That seems so far fetched to me. But I guess the opposite seems far fetched to many people so I don't know...
So far as getting into space, I am more of the conclusion that we did a number to ourselves already, now we need to fix it and also to accept our destiny...in a way.
That this is what we were given to work with (Earth) and this is what we need to work with. But IF they had bio-spheres in space, Space-stations for living, and they made them open to everyone, not just to the elite classes...that could be cool too. I just don't see it happening anytime soon. Maybe I'm not an optimist after all!
uaafanblog
Neither would be my first choice, but getting permanent stations on the moon would also go a long way toward finding other planets. But finding them and getting there are two very different things. I don't see interstellar, manned spacecraft in our immediate future. But there is a great big Solar system out there for us to keep busy with for the next few thousand years.
As an aside, if I had 10 billion I would invest in electric cars, alternative energy(solar, wind, tide, ocean currents, etc.) and the Space Elevator research. Send robots to do our basic exploration, we need to concentrate on getting more practical ways of getting to Low Earth Orbit, it's easy to go everywhere else from there.
Grumpy
QUOTE
if tomorrow you had 10 billion dollars to spend and only two choices as to spending it would you:
Fund a comprehensive TPF mission ...
or
Complete the first phase of a permanent Lunar settlement ...
Fund a comprehensive TPF mission ...
or
Complete the first phase of a permanent Lunar settlement ...
Neither would be my first choice, but getting permanent stations on the moon would also go a long way toward finding other planets. But finding them and getting there are two very different things. I don't see interstellar, manned spacecraft in our immediate future. But there is a great big Solar system out there for us to keep busy with for the next few thousand years.
As an aside, if I had 10 billion I would invest in electric cars, alternative energy(solar, wind, tide, ocean currents, etc.) and the Space Elevator research. Send robots to do our basic exploration, we need to concentrate on getting more practical ways of getting to Low Earth Orbit, it's easy to go everywhere else from there.
Grumpy
QUOTE (Grumpy+Jan 10 2008, 10:36 AM)
uaafanblog
Neither would be my first choice, but getting permanent stations on the moon would also go a long way toward finding other planets. But finding them and getting there are two very different things. I don't see interstellar, manned spacecraft in our immediate future. But there is a great big Solar system out there for us to keep busy with for the next few thousand years.
As an aside, if I had 10 billion I would invest in electric cars, alternative energy(solar, wind, tide, ocean currents, etc.) and the Space Elevator research. Send robots to do our basic exploration, we need to concentrate on getting more practical ways of getting to Low Earth Orbit, it's easy to go everywhere else from there.
Grumpy
All good points and certainly things that need to be considered however; allow me to suggest that the sooner you get the minimum number (genetically speaking) of humans onto another viable planet the better. As time progresses so does the chance that we'll clusterfook ourselves into oblivion. Seeding ourselves outside our neighborhood is the best way to ensure our genetic material continues and that ultimately seems to me to be of the highest importance.
And I'm not convinced that getting to a system that lies 40ly's distance isn't possible in even the next couple of hundred years. Several currently proposed propulsion systems look to be able to do the job; potentially in a single lifetime and definitely in a generational timeframe and those systems seem to be attainable at our current level of engineering.
It's weird to me as I get older how numbers like 1 billion dollars and 10 billion dollars are rapidly becoming almost miniscule.
Neither would be my first choice, but getting permanent stations on the moon would also go a long way toward finding other planets. But finding them and getting there are two very different things. I don't see interstellar, manned spacecraft in our immediate future. But there is a great big Solar system out there for us to keep busy with for the next few thousand years.
As an aside, if I had 10 billion I would invest in electric cars, alternative energy(solar, wind, tide, ocean currents, etc.) and the Space Elevator research. Send robots to do our basic exploration, we need to concentrate on getting more practical ways of getting to Low Earth Orbit, it's easy to go everywhere else from there.
Grumpy
All good points and certainly things that need to be considered however; allow me to suggest that the sooner you get the minimum number (genetically speaking) of humans onto another viable planet the better. As time progresses so does the chance that we'll clusterfook ourselves into oblivion. Seeding ourselves outside our neighborhood is the best way to ensure our genetic material continues and that ultimately seems to me to be of the highest importance.
And I'm not convinced that getting to a system that lies 40ly's distance isn't possible in even the next couple of hundred years. Several currently proposed propulsion systems look to be able to do the job; potentially in a single lifetime and definitely in a generational timeframe and those systems seem to be attainable at our current level of engineering.
It's weird to me as I get older how numbers like 1 billion dollars and 10 billion dollars are rapidly becoming almost miniscule.
QUOTE (uaafanblog+Jan 11 2008, 02:30 AM)
It's weird to me as I get older how numbers like 1 billion dollars and 10 billion dollars are rapidly becoming almost miniscule.
So I take it corporate America can't buy you at any price then?
Someone just bought me a really expensive present and it gave me a significant amount of pleasure destroying it.
Cheers
Darren
So I take it corporate America can't buy you at any price then?
Someone just bought me a really expensive present and it gave me a significant amount of pleasure destroying it.
Cheers
Darren
QUOTE (paul h+Jan 1 2008, 12:26 PM)
IMHO,
Their not there. If they were they would have found us by now.
I'm sure that someone here could crunch the numbers and come up with the probability of this.
The universe is ~13. something billion years old. Our rock is what 3.5 million. and of course there are many planets that are much younger than ours. by now either we would have found them or they would have found us. And I think that the odds are better in favor of them finding us based on how much older the universe is compared to us. After all as old as we are we have only been looking for about what 50 or so years?
it's possible however, since we don't know exactly how long life will exist on Earth, that there may have been life elsewhere in the Universe at some stage before there was life on Earth, that no longer exists. Likewise it is possible that there may be, in the future, life elsewhere in the Universe after the time that life on Earth does not exist. (If you know what I mean.)
I suppose it's also possible that life may have existed somewhere and had been sending signals that had been travelling right up until the point just before when human life has been intellegent enough to be able to detect life elsewhere in the Universe. Although the last of 'their' signals (after travelling millions of light years) may have just passed Earth a few years before we were able to detect them. Sod's Law like.
So think I'm trying to say that time is a factor also. The Universe is so vast that it may just require an amazing co-incidence of timing to get two intellegent species of life living close enough to each other within the same time frame to be able to detect one or each other.
Their not there. If they were they would have found us by now.
I'm sure that someone here could crunch the numbers and come up with the probability of this.
The universe is ~13. something billion years old. Our rock is what 3.5 million. and of course there are many planets that are much younger than ours. by now either we would have found them or they would have found us.
And I think that the odds are better in favor of them finding us based on how much older the universe is compared to us. After all as old as we are we have only been looking for about what 50 or so years? it's possible however, since we don't know exactly how long life will exist on Earth, that there may have been life elsewhere in the Universe at some stage before there was life on Earth, that no longer exists. Likewise it is possible that there may be, in the future, life elsewhere in the Universe after the time that life on Earth does not exist. (If you know what I mean.)
I suppose it's also possible that life may have existed somewhere and had been sending signals that had been travelling right up until the point just before when human life has been intellegent enough to be able to detect life elsewhere in the Universe. Although the last of 'their' signals (after travelling millions of light years) may have just passed Earth a few years before we were able to detect them. Sod's Law like.
So think I'm trying to say that time is a factor also. The Universe is so vast that it may just require an amazing co-incidence of timing to get two intellegent species of life living close enough to each other within the same time frame to be able to detect one or each other.
QUOTE (uaafanblog+Jan 11 2008, 03:30 PM)
Seeding ourselves outside our neighborhood is the best way to ensure our genetic material continues and that ultimately seems to me to be of the highest importance.
I started a thread a while back on this: Seeding the galaxy, Using nanotech to colonise the stars.
I started a thread a while back on this: Seeding the galaxy, Using nanotech to colonise the stars.
QUOTE (N O M+Jan 15 2008, 07:18 PM)
I started a thread a while back on this: Seeding the galaxy, Using nanotech to colonise the stars.
Has anyone suggested that we may be the result of such an experiment? It's been done in sci-fi, as have so many things that have come to be.
An experiment gone wrong! 
Has anyone suggested that we may be the result of such an experiment? It's been done in sci-fi, as have so many things that have come to be.
An experiment gone wrong!
I hadn't considered that 
So if we find the probe, what do we do? Nuke it? Or worship it?
So if we find the probe, what do we do? Nuke it? Or worship it?
Cover it with huge mounds of Tennessee red clay and hope no one discovers their true beginnings? Besides they would probably try and worship it....
We have checked the near vicinity of planets and stars, none which brought much luck. If they are out there, they are far, far, far, far away. So far that if they were technologically advanced enough to find us and reach us, they have no use for us, because we are behind them in technology. Zap every human, and you got another terrestrial planet, the gold of the universe, a prize worthy of intelligent creatures.
Who says we're intelligent? Why would Zxgjot want Earth? They are much more likely to have evolved with a different set of instructions in the cellular machine, suited to their own world.
I have helped with the SETI program using my PCs to help with the computing power needed to analyse data.
Whether life exists,existed or will exist is pretty straight forward. Most likely yes.
Intelligent life, maybe. Whether we will receive data that proves there is, will probably never happen. But as a human race we strive to ask questions about the unknown or unproven, and strive even harder to prove/disprove the fact. I think questions, however stupid and improbable they are, are needed.
Whether life exists,existed or will exist is pretty straight forward. Most likely yes.
Intelligent life, maybe. Whether we will receive data that proves there is, will probably never happen. But as a human race we strive to ask questions about the unknown or unproven, and strive even harder to prove/disprove the fact. I think questions, however stupid and improbable they are, are needed.
NT
>I have helped with the SETI program using my PCs to help with the computing power needed to analyse data.
yea, me too: but after the program ran for about 2 hours I desided that if ET was out there I should have found him by then, so I gave up.
Now what was all of the UFO stuff in the news last week?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo-dx35bCvc
>I have helped with the SETI program using my PCs to help with the computing power needed to analyse data.
yea, me too: but after the program ran for about 2 hours I desided that if ET was out there I should have found him by then, so I gave up.
Now what was all of the UFO stuff in the news last week?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo-dx35bCvc
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.