Nice response, Johnson:
Seti does not broadcast. We are only listening, so it isn't about sending signals to aliens and hoping they can understand us, but instead listening to the cosmos for signs of artificial broadcasts.
yes. that's correct. Did you see Geo's link that gives a brief explanation of what SETI is searching for?
Look at if you haven't already. It's a great little article.
As outlined by Sagan himself, one of the possible dead-ringers for an un-natural signal source would be a progression of beats that produce prime numbers. Using the reasoning that if we humans decided we wanted to make ourselve obvious to another society searching the skies for signs of us, we would use a simple pattern that could only have been generated by intelligent entities. That's not saying that that specifically is what SETI is looking for, but things along those lines.
First of all, Sagan himself is not an expert on alien intelligence, advanced alien civilizations, alien language, or alien communication transmissions/ and or methods. A progression of prime number beats would
possibly be a "dead-ringer" for an attempt at communication by a HUMAN, not an alien. That is a projection fallacy:
- we are intelligent. we would attempt communication this way. we would signal this way, therefore, this is what we should be looking for and if we find it, it's "intelligence"
Falsification. If there ever was a signal like this detected, the people dog-piling ways to falsify would be lined up around the block. Not being an astronomer myself, what i would do is sit on that signal and look for the signal to change to something that can be explained through natural means. Then comes the big question that if we've actually discovered an alien signal, would we want to broadcast back to them to reveal ourselves in like signals?
I think you're right with the above comment. And that's how I as a layman imagine how things would unfold.
However, what I understood from the link Geo provided, SETI isn't actually looking for patterns.
Here is a quote from Geo's link: (emphasis mine)
"SETI scientists do not look for patterns but rather a lack of patterns in a signal. Although this may seem puzzling, it¿s really a matter of physics. The first challenge facing any SETI project is detecting a signal against the background of cosmic and terrestrial noise. A signal containing a great deal of information will be spread across the spectrum more than a very simple signal containing little information would be. An "informative" signal will look more like random noise and thus will be harder to detect. So, in SETI, we look for very simple signals"
My question is how would the detection of a lack of patterns that's interpreted as an intelligent communication be falsified if we don't have anything to compare it to that's alien? How would the scientific method be applied here?
Trying every possible formulation of natural phenomena to duplicate a pattern like the primes would of course come first on the list. IS there any combination of pulsars and black holes that could make that signal? If anything else at all could be responsible, that will be probably taken as the most likely scenario, especially if the signal does not repeat itself.
We know its natural phenomena that's up there in the sky.
What we don't know is a) how much is out there and, b) how much of it is noise we've never heard, is capable of masking an intelligent signal, or c) if something that doesn't appear to be a binary intelligent signal IS in fact an intelligent signal.
What's the criteria that's distinguishing all this?
And how many patterns of primes are we talking about?
When do we abandon the search? When it is no longer economically feasible. When a better more cost effective method is created to scan the skies for signals. Given the size of the visible universe and the miniscule amount of sky that SETI can cover it would take forever to really look at enough sky to say we've ruled out any territory. SETI trains itself to look at a pinprick of the night sky for however many hours and then moves on. The very second they turn away from that star they could be getting bombarded by alien S.O.S. signals and we wouldn't know. SETI is even worse than scooping a spoonful of water out of the ocean and concluding that there were no whales. You could never rule out any star based on having just listened to it last month.
It's abandoned when nobody wants to privately fund it any more. It's already been abandoned by public funding.
So anyone willing to donate is free to do so. I don't see anything wrong with that and hope it continues.
But the question is, if this was public funded science, how long would we fund it just because we are told it's a valid scientific experiment - despite zero progress and zero evidence for over 20 years?
Science isn't practiced in a vacuum.
It really is a tremendous crap-shoot with no gaurantee of success. Does it need to go on? I think it's worth while. But i also think the odds are incredibly stacked against it.
Right. Then it ceases to become a working hypothesis.
Is a hypothesis that produces nothing after 20 years still a scientific hypothesis?
Maybe in your heart it still is. In the scientific community, it dies.
Hypothesis. There may be intelligent species who have learned to modulate RF frequencies and transmit them for their own purposes.
It is known that such signals as generated in our own experience can be intercepted and interpretted to be evidence of our own existence. And even if such signals can not be decoded to read the specific message, they can be shown to carry coded content, distinct from natually occuring sources of radiation.
Experiment. Listen to stars and look for signals not consistent with naturally occuring "noise".
be shown to carry coded content??
therefore what? It's got to be intelligent??
really now..
we aren't saying that about DNA,
are we?
