Mad_maxx wrote: » im afraid you are quite wrong
EmmetSpiceland wrote: Why is everyone always afraid of an alien “civilisation†coming here? If they are that far advanced what would they need us for? There is nothing here that they can’t find, in abundance, out in space.
Smiles35 wrote: » Hundreds of years to reach the nearest star Max. Not thousands.
ThunderCat wrote: » It would take us 80,000 years to reach our nearest star using current technology.
Smiles35 wrote: » There was talk of a new signal detectector being built in Austrailia. I'd love some Irish govenment investment towards this. It's eminently interesting for resonably small outlay.
Mad_maxx wrote: » more like a few thousand years , would take thousands of years to reach the nearest star ,we,ve made very little progress re_ exploring the universe
ThunderCat wrote: » Nevermind radio signals and the likes that degrade rapidly, it's our atmosphere that would give us away. The light from our atmosphere can be split using a spectrograph or spectroscope to show the chemical makeup of the atmosphere. We have that technology now, nevermind an advanced alien civilization. What our atmosphere tells the cosmos is that we have naturally occurring greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and water vapor but we also have synthetic man made compounds such as CFC's and hydrofluorocarbons. That tells anyone looking all they need to know. There is nothing we can do about it and because that information is contained in the light reflecting off Earth, it can be seen from all directions from many many light years away, maybe much further depending on the level of alien technology involved. And that is how we in turn will end up finding signs of intelligent life in the Cosmos. The James Webb Space Telescope, due to launch in the next few years, is designed to do exactly that and will be analyzing the atmospheres of exoplanets in our galaxy.
Potential-Monke wrote: » You can relax, most sci-fi alien films based in and around now were completely off the ball with how advanced we would be at this stage. We won't encounter aliens for another few hundred years at least imo. And if they land tomorrow, I welcome our new alien overlords.
Smiles35 wrote: » To get our governments pockets involved in the search for extraterrestrial life.
antiskeptic wrote: » The chance of an intelligence only being as advanced as we are must be pretty slim. They are more likely than not going be more advanced than us (in the event ETI exists).
Yet we actively go looking for what would, in all likelyhood, be a superior species. The blind assumption ( one which appears to be contra-indicated, given said history) is that ETI would be benevolent.
Wanderer78 wrote: » lobby group for what?
Smiles35 wrote: » Anyone intested is starting a 'lobby-group' to get some government involement? If so, give me a pm.
Peregrinus wrote: » Possibly this one? An incredibly cool project to build a widely-dispersed network of linked radiotelescopes in areas of virtual terrestrial radio silence - hence, the Australian outback, the Karoo desert. While it could be, and probably would be, used for SETI detection purposes, that's pretty far down on the list of projects and priorities.
antiskeptic wrote: » I stand corrected. Failing a giant tinfoil hat in space, we are as the opening sequence in Contact shows - a veritable electromagnetic cacophony. Nevertheless, designing signals to enhance our being detected does strike as a bit of a risky punt to be taking
antiskeptic wrote: » The search for extra terrestrial intelligence involves beaming information into space in the hope that there is a sufficiently advanced intelligence out there to pick it up. The allied hope must be that said life will respond. Such intelligence would have to be as at least as advanced as we are - it is only comparatively recently that we have been in a position to beam the fact and location of our existence into space. The chance of an intelligence only being as advanced as we are must be pretty slim. They are more likely than not going be more advanced than us (in the event ETI exists). Now, we have a pretty good indication of what a species who superior to other species or even others of their own species tend to do. Look at all of history. Yet we actively go looking for what would, in all likelyhood, be a superior species. The blind assumption ( one which appears to be contra-indicated, given said history) is that ETI would be benevolent. The one thing that protects us is vast space, just like great distance protects you as a snooker player. Yet we're putting our name up in lights .. which strikes me as stupidity of the highest order.
Peregrinus wrote: » If the term "dipstick" must be used, we should perhaps reserve it for those who so comprehensively misunderstand the SETI project. The focus of the project is the reverse of what you suggest; not to radiate signals outwards into space but to monitor and analyse signals from space, to search for patterns that suggests design, structure, communication, etc rather than simply naturally occurring electromagnetic and other radiation. The aim is not to be detected by our own broadcasts, but rather to detect others through their broadcasts. As for the dangers attendant upon being detected by our own broadcasts, that ship has pretty comprehensively sailed. Ship-to-shore and ship-to-ship radio telegraphy was developed in the 1890s century, and the first signals sent by this method are still travelling outwards through space, having now (obviously) reached a distance of about 125 light years from Earth. They were weak signals with limited structure and would be extremely difficult to detect, but the volume and structuring of signals being broadcast into space increased hugely with the advent of general radio broadcasting in the 1920s, and then television in the 1950s. For decades now we have been pumping prodigious quantities of structured electromagnetic signals travelling at the speed of light in - literally - all directions from Earth. These broadcasts are not made with the object of being detected, but they are eminently detectable all the same. What is called "Active SETI" is the broadcasting of signals with the specific hope of their being detected and successfully analysed. It does happen, but it's a tiny, tiny part of the overal SETI project. The aim is to broadcast signals which are designed to be capable of being analysed from first principles in the hope we can thereby communicate information to other cultures, without knowing what we have in common with them. For the reason just given this doesn't materially increase the chances of our presence being detected, and indeed the most likely cultures to receive and analyse these signals are cultures which have already detected our presence from general broadcasting, and are therefore paying attention to this particular corner of space.
Peregrinus wrote: » Yes, the signals do degrade. Also, they get swamped by background radiation, But even a quite degraded signal, only partly received,may be identified as artificial, not natural, and that's all that is necessary for an alien civilisation to conclude that the place they emanate from must contain a life-form sufficiently intelligent to generate electromagnetic signals. And we're sending out signals of that kind all the time - as in, 24/7. It may well be correct that radar signals are more likely to be detected than radio or television broadcasts, but so what? Either way, the aliens detecting the signals don't need to understand their purpose or function in order to know of our existence.
Peregrinus wrote: » As for the dangers attendant upon being detected by our own broadcasts, that ship has pretty comprehensively sailed. Ship-to-shore and ship-to-ship radio telegraphy was developed in the 1890s century, and the first signals sent by this method are still travelling outwards through space, having now (obviously) reached a distance of about 125 light years from Earth. They were weak signals with limited structure and would be extremely difficult to detect, but the volume and structuring of signals being broadcast into space increased hugely with the advent of general radio broadcasting in the 1920s, and then television in the 1950s. For decades now we have been pumping prodigious quantities of structured electromagnetic signals travelling at the speed of light in - literally - all directions from Earth. These broadcasts are not made with the object of being detected, but they are eminently detectable all the same.
Del2005 wrote: » We put our address on the Pioneer space craft!
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0e54e8024b002427df3ce2953d22b721.svg)