[net.space] s.e.t.i

cjh@csin.UUCP (07/20/83)

This message is empty.

REM@MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP (07/22/83)

From:  Robert Elton Maas <REM @ MIT-MC>

Here's my view on this. We certainly can't prove life elsewhere
impossible until we've examined every little nook and cranney in the
Universe, which makes the question moot since at that point we've
filled every nook and cranney with our own stuff and probably dumped
contamination around which has evolved in strange ways. What we can do
is set an upper bound on the extent of life elsewhere, the same way we
set upper bounds on other quantities such as deviation from
inverse-square law (last I heard F=m1*m2/r^k where k=2.0000000000000
plus or minus some small number in that last place, or somesuch). So
far we have shown ETI hasn't conquered Earth in any gross way or
jammed our communications. With our next series of experiments we hope
to either **FIND** intelligent life elsewhere or set a new upper-bound
that on hundreds of nearby stars no major broadcasting such as TV or
radar is occurring presently. As years go by we will continue to crank
down the limit on life elsewhere or actually discover some out there.

It's literally we can't refute the hypothesis "there is life
elsewhere", thus that literal hypothesis isn't scientific. But we can
refute "The Galaxy is teeming with civilizations as advanced as hours"
within the next 50 years, and "The Galaxy is teeming with microscopic
life on every little planet that happens to be at the right
temperature" within the next few hundred years, or sooner if we get
those Alpha Centuri and Epsilon Eridani probes launched in time.
Therefore statements about specific amounts of "teeming with life" are
indeed scientifically valid. In particular, Sagan's major question,
whether there are billions of advanced civilizations in this galaxy or
just a handful, can be decided within the next 50 years.

dietz%usc-cse@USC-ECL@sri-unix.UUCP (07/24/83)

I seem to recall reading in SPACEFLIGHT (a British Interplanetary
Society publication) that all-sky radio searches have already set an
upper limit of about 20,000 on the number of very advanced
civilizations in the galaxy (where very advanced means with beacons we
could detect).

A recent issue also pointed out that even with a manufacturing
efficiency of .1% antimatter would make sense as a rocket fuel, and
antimatter reaction engines would not be difficult to build (p + anti-p
reaction produces mostly charged pions, which can be directed aft with
strong magnetic fields).  To get some idea of the energy involved, one
gigawatt for one year is about 10 kg; at .1% efficiency 10 tons of
antimatter would need about 10 million gigawatts for one year.  This is
the amount of sunlight passing through a square several thousand
kilometers on a side in earth orbit, in one year.

 

dgd@ukc.UUCP (D.G.Dixon) (08/01/83)

 perhaps planetary civilisations only emit radio communications
 for a brief developing stage in their history. we seem to be
 moving more toward tight-beam communications, cables, optical
 fibres etc. even radar may be replaced by laser systems so in a few 
 generations earth may become radio-quiet once again.
 
 douglas adams writes a good story but are dolphins really as
 intelligent as he/l.niven et.al. would like to think?

dgd

...!vax135!ukc!dgd

ucbesvax.turner@ucbcad.UUCP (08/07/83)

#R:ukc:-388700:ucbesvax:8700006:000:3290
ucbesvax!turner    Aug  3 23:56:00 1983

Re: Radio emissions as a decades-long blip in E.T. civilizations

If we can assume that most technological civilizations go through
the same phases in communications (radio to optics), then this might
be a clue in itself.  By watching the skies for radio activity that
lasts only a few decades, we have a fair indication of a civilization
that is moving toward the ability to receive and send transmissions.

Some major objections to this argument:

	1 Would it be detectable against the background radio noise
	  present in the stellar locality?
	
	2 Don't some (non-sentient) objects out these have periodic
	  behavior of this sort (more noise, of a more deceptive kind)?

The argument that radio will become passe has some weight, but only for
those civilizations that have no interest in or little awareness of space.
(Laser technology will have to improve fantastically in order to match
radio achievements like the Deep Space Network.)  That's not to rule it out.
A very large cloud-covered planet with no moon might take a long time
discovering that their planet went around the sun rather than vice versa.
This might not be a real impediment to technological advancement--although
I see strong arguments to the contrary, given the pivotal role of astronomy
in the sciences of antiquity.

We might be thinking about how important it is to have a moon; or a planet
small enough that its size can be measured by the techniques of the early
Greek geometers; or having a neighboring planet far enough away, and with
moons far enough from *it* (i.e., a "jupiter"), that the finiteness of
light-speed can be measured by Galilean (?) techniques; or an orbit large
enough to make stellar parallax a reliable technique for determining at
least the orders of magnitude involved in stellar distances.  Astronomy
provided alarming evidence that counter-intuitive perceptions of the
universe, based on barely visible phenomena, might have some weight.
The persistence and insight of a pitifully small number of people had
a staggering impact on history.

Astronomy was, perhaps, the first real science; and optics had to be at
least empirically understood to get beyond a certain point.  It would be
a very lucky race to live in a planetary system where all these effects
were visible with their native optical equipment (i.e., "eyes".)  Good
clocks were also important, but this is a little easier.  Having materials
for the fabrication of lenses seems to be the crucial thing.

Without knowing much more than we do about the "average" planet out there,
it's going to be hard to come to an assessment of current SETI strategies.
The only major breakthrough I've seen is in paleobiology: some researchers
have begun to think that spontaneous protein synthesis was a lot less chancy
than they originally thought--it just seems to fall right out of the early
chemistry of our planet.  Perhaps this has bearing on the chances for life
elsewhere, and hence, the chances for intelligent life.

Another breakthrough is cryogenic circuits, which operate best at temperatures
near the background temperature of the universe.  Here at Berkeley, they
are making Josephson junction receivers which are *very* sensitive.  Perhaps
good "ears" can be made from these.

	Michael Turner
	ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner