They’re not saying it’s aliens, but signal traced to sunlike star sparks SETI interest

a reply to: choocha

I agree that if a ship appeared in our sky's uninvited people and nations would indeed attempt to shoot the thing down. But if its a ship that has the capability to cross the vast distances between the stars while remaining intact i don't think we would have much in our arsenals that would be of much use.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
Whether they are currently advanced when compared with us, or behind us by a few decades, the fact is that they will not have advanced beyond our capabilities, without first having reached them. One does not run, before one can walk.

Quite so. Another thing to consider is the whole distance/time aspect. It might seem fairly unlikely and "coincidental" that an alien civilization say, 100 light years away from us, might be exactly 100 years ahead of us technologically (so that they would be using radio 100 years ago) just such that we can pick up their signals here on Earth now and they discernible to us at our level of technology.

On the other hand, if there are as some people claim, MANY, MANY civilizations out there, it quickly becomes unlikely that we would NOT detect signals from them -- 500 light years away and 500 years ahead of us, 1,000 light years away and 1,000 years ahead of us, 1,500 light years away and 1,500 years ahead of us, and so on. And at a certain point, we should be detecting numerous broadcasts anywhere we point our telescopes into the sky.

Of course, if we're only dealing with is good ol' radio (and not psychic transmissions or quantum entanglement links, or whatever) there will be limits as defined by physics. We're going to be limited in our ability to detect the signals. The signals themselves will degrade into noise fairly quickly. And there might not be any other civilizations out there to begin with. Anyway, at this point the problem is a technological one, rather than a philosophical one, and we can possibly find answers by throwing more money and technology at the problem. We have some people working on the problem.

It kind of all depends on how much money we're willing to invest in chasing ghosts. Because even if we do detect a real signal, the farther away it is, the more likely the creatures who sent it are long gone, and we'll never be able to have any back-and-forth dialog with them anyway.

If it's been a year and radio signals travel at the speed of light and it's only 95 light years away you'd think they'd have picked up more of them by now if it got their attention. My guess is they would have gone right to "taking a closer look" at it to see if they could pick up anything else.

originally posted by: choocha

originally posted by: glend
We should send a interstellar probe there except for the fact we have none because the world is too busy spending USD1,676B a year blowing ourselves up instead of exploring the greater universe.

Which is one of the reason why I don't think any "higher intelligent" species would even want to contact us. If a ship ever appeared in our skies it would probably be shot at before anything.

What makes you think any intelligent species that would even be interested in us would be any "better" than we are in that regard?

My opinion on it was always that if there are other "human-like" species in the universe they would have probably destroyed themselves long before they harnessed the technology for interstellar travel.


The ability to invent something doesn't preclude the proclivity to use it to destroy things. I have really never quite understood the human desire to find others like us. Since the only thing we do that makes us out of the ordinary is that we're unbelievably destructive compared to most everything else on earth.

The best thing we could hope for is finding another planet that we can use and hoping there isn't anything as bad as humans already there.

I wonder IF there really are sentient beings like us in the known universe and we haven't made contact yet...it can be the following scenarios:

(this works on the premise that were the ones searching for them and not the other way around)

1. They are too far from us. We don't have the tech to detect them and even if we do, they don't have the tech that is discoverable to us who are searching for them.

2. They have the tech that is discoverable but it's too advanced for us to detect.

3. We have detected a tech that indicates sentient beings are out there but we do not know how to move forward with the discovery.

It is in my opinion we are in scenario three. I imagine it would take a United Nations policy to come up with a concrete and sound "alien contact protocol" that all world leaders will agree to. Unless I'm mistaken there's no UN policy on this.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

Well it may also be they were around before our radio telescopes were looking. Rewlly there is only a few decades of looking so its a little less probably the two collide. We have used radio waves for about 100 years and they are already being diminshed as a form of communication and data transfer. In another 100 they may be obsolete all together in which case we would have 200 years of transmissions say that need to overlap with another alien world looking for radio waves in a 200 year period in addition to the distance. Which also degrades the signal.

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
My opinion on it was always that if there are other "human-like" species in the universe they would have probably destroyed themselves long before they harnessed the technology for interstellar travel.

The trick is, they wouldn't necessarily have to "destroy themselves" for them to vanish in a relatively short period of time. If their technology progressed along the same lines as ours, then along with broadcasting and detecting radio signals, they would have also made similar advances in computers, virtual reality, robotics and genetic manipulation. All of these good things could have made them vanish, just like they'll change or destroy us in the next 500 years or so.

Perhaps, like us, they would have figured out that the universe is far too huge and dangerous and difficult to travel around in, and they turned inward to explore virtual worlds and lives instead. If we physically interact with them at all, it will be with their superintelligent robots.

Personally speaking I don't believe we are alone and only the arrogance of man would assume we are. Either way SETI is once again in the news with another possible signal that could potentially be non natural occurring.

Its nice to see what you said here and I do think slowly more people are starting to see this is an obvious and mathematically simple equation that life should exist elsewhere if life is here.

There is far to many humans that deny this, however it is understandable. Humans on MASS have been denied searching for real answers by being blindfolded with religion.

We will find life soon, could have been sooner without religion slowly the human race down however once it is found, it will be the end to religion thankfully but they will not go away without a fight I am sure. Considering the establishment itself is run by many religious people that condemn the findings of other life and probably the reason we have yet to hear about it thus far.

Just like OIL, RELIGION has lots of money to loose once life is found.

Now, to the news you posted. It is wonderful news and thankfully news that is trickling our way.

Just another false positive used to lure in more funding for a useless project. Just like the 100's of "Earth like planet" found lol. All of these threads about these topics , have one thing in common. collecting dust with nothing new .

originally posted by: seedofchucky
Just another false positive used to lure in more funding for a useless project. Just like the 100's of "Earth like planet" found lol. All of these threads about these topics , have one thing in common. collecting dust with nothing new .

You don't think the exoplanet discoveries have been (and continue to be) important?

a reply to: Greggers

Suppose that depends on who you ask, i mean try asking some poor homeless fellow how important he finds the subject of the discovery of exoplanets and i think you may find they have other pressing matters to attend to.

Your right through it is an important field of study but hardly an area we should be expending resources upon considering the current socioeconomic climate world wide.

I am sure that many of you are aware that the earth has a finite length of time of existence, and that 'life' on earth has occurred within a narrow spectrum of that time, and that sentient intelligent life (particularly of ourselves) an even narrower spectrum of that time. 'If' we are able to pass through the trials and tribulations of our 'technological adolescence' and not destroy ourselves, and 'if' we are able to survive through all the natural disasters that could befall us here on earth and from space, it is not unreasonable to suggest, or to accept, that our destiny is ultimately to move out into and travel through space...colonising suitable planets and planetoids as we go. The fact is, after surviving through all that could destroy us and take us to extinction, we have no choice but to reach for the stars, simply because our planet has a finite span of existence.

The longer we tarry to make it to the stars, the more likely it grows that we will go into extinction. I would suggest that this understanding is reached by all evolving and developing sentient intelligences no matter wherever in the universe they may emerge? The safest place for the longevity of any species of intelligence is out in space, in ships that allow them to fly away from trouble like birds from a forest fire.

For an emergent sentient intelligence to truly colonize space it would necessarily need to overcome many of the formidable and (at present time) seemingly impossible obstacles that make a leap into life in space beyond our current reach.

The first of which is to overcome or circumnavigate bio-entropy which brings about death. The most salient aspect of being human is our mind. All our mental life which relies on memory for its foundation and daily re-attribution of person-hood from sleep or coma, would be required to become transferable. Some means or mechanism needs to be found by which all a person's mental life could be downloaded and transferred to a new optimal body. Either that or we need to find some way of arresting or fully eliminating the ageing process once the human body reaches optimal peak fitness.

Our bodies and minds age parallel with each other from birth to adulthood, but once we pass adulthood the the body enters into a long and ever increasing influence of entropy which ultimately leads to death. The mind, however, continues on unabated and only ages with experience and seemingly never enters or is unaffected by the entropy the body undergoes until the body can no longer sustain the entity that emerged with it, and thus dies, or rather dissipates away. Belief in an afterlife having no scope within this discussion.

Of course, extending people's life span carries with it a massive insult upon the earth's finite resources, so if we are able to come up with a way to extend life, we had better have overcome one or two other obstacles that enable us to become the 'Star Trekkers' which is our destiny. Advanced civilisations would I believe have followed similar paths of destiny, and initially would colonize their own star systems, and send out drones to scout out other star systems. They would have advanced ethical and moral constraints (without which, no sentient intelligence could survive itself), and wherever they found planets with evolving or already evolved life forms and intelligences, they would keep their distance and only observe, and would not interact unless they had a real good reason to do so.

Is there life out there all around the vast reaches of space? I like to think so. I like to think that we here on earth, are just another emerging sentient intelligence with a long destiny to becoming a part of and participate in the hoped for galactic federation of benign sentient intelligences.

a reply to: Greggers

I do . But not like this . They keep making articles about earth like planets and makes me mad. Because think of all the other ones you've heard about , that have faded into dust . As for the signal . Its just another poor attempt to keep seti up and running , because its been nothing but a failure since its launch. There is to many false positives from setting up a seti system on earth . We need to set up a giant SETI system in outter space to minize the interferance. I'm sick and tired of tax payer dollars going to projects ran by small minds. We've wasted trillions in space. and all we've mastered is lower earth orbit , and even that we have problems. The right people in charge , with all that money . We would've had tours to mars and beyond by now.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
My opinion on it was always that if there are other "human-like" species in the universe they would have probably destroyed themselves long before they harnessed the technology for interstellar travel.

The trick is, they wouldn't necessarily have to "destroy themselves" for them to vanish in a relatively short period of time. If their technology progressed along the same lines as ours, then along with broadcasting and detecting radio signals, they would have also made similar advances in computers, virtual reality, robotics and genetic manipulation. All of these good things could have made them vanish, just like they'll change or destroy us in the next 500 years or so.

Perhaps, like us, they would have figured out that the universe is far too huge and dangerous and difficult to travel around in, and they turned inward to explore virtual worlds and lives instead. If we physically interact with them at all, it will be with their superintelligent robots.

Or maybe any superintelligent robots that we (or a similar species) would make would have all of the same strengths and flaws as we do only amplified exponentially. So if we ever do create such a thing, we could potentially destroy everything in the universe as we know it. Or so could they. Which might make it less likely than we think that they exist at all. Because if they did, it seems likely that this possibility would have had to have happened at least once already.

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: seedofchucky
Just another false positive used to lure in more funding for a useless project. Just like the 100's of "Earth like planet" found lol. All of these threads about these topics , have one thing in common. collecting dust with nothing new .

You don't think the exoplanet discoveries have been (and continue to be) important?

Planet hunting is very useful in general expansion of knowledge on the universe, the specific scientific disciplines and technologies involved, and in (hopefully) capturing the imagination of youth to get them instead in science.

However, SETI is a waste due to their utterly inefficient approach. They use a purely luck based approach that requires looking at the right star at the right time, which given the number of observable stars is lunacy. They need to work up a list based on stellar age, stars with planets that may be in the habitable range, and then watch for years before moving to the next.

originally posted by: seedofchucky
a reply to: Greggers

I do . But not like this . They keep making articles about earth like planets and makes me mad. Because think of all the other ones you've heard about , that have faded into dust .

They didn't fade into the dust. They're still out there. And we'll study them in more detail when the James Webb goes online. In the meantime, they continue to increase our knowledge of the galaxy.

originally posted by: daerath

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: seedofchucky
Just another false positive used to lure in more funding for a useless project. Just like the 100's of "Earth like planet" found lol. All of these threads about these topics , have one thing in common. collecting dust with nothing new .

You don't think the exoplanet discoveries have been (and continue to be) important?

Planet hunting is very useful in general expansion of knowledge on the universe, the specific scientific disciplines and technologies involved, and in (hopefully) capturing the imagination of youth to get them instead in science.

However, SETI is a waste due to their utterly inefficient approach. They use a purely luck based approach that requires looking at the right star at the right time, which given the number of observable stars is lunacy. They need to work up a list based on stellar age, stars with planets that may be in the habitable range, and then watch for years before moving to the next.

I'm not cheering for SETI. I'm simply arguing that all those earth-like planets discovered by Kepler (and soon to be studied in more depth by Webb) are worthwhile findings in and of themselves.

a reply to: choocha

Agree its a given that intelligent life exists out there, but its possible that radio waves are only used by advancing civilisations for a short time before they learn how to transmit through other dimensions of space-time not restricted by the speed of light. If that is the case, SETI may never detect any signals. Our best hope might be to try find atmospheric biosignatures using spectroscopy.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: choocha

Agree its a given that intelligent life exists out there, but its possible that radio waves are only used by advancing civilisations for a short time before they learn how to transmit through other dimensions of space-time not restricted by the speed of light. If that is the case, SETI may never detect any signals. Our best hope might be to try find atmospheric biosignatures using spectroscopy.

To your point, Earth itself is already starting to go dark from a radiowave perspective.