Astronomers Detect Over 200 Potentially Intelligent Signals From Solar Type Stars

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Really, really big.
Vastly, hugely...

Couldn't wait so I went ahead and broke the
code. Apparently it's a filling station advert
for Uranium 115 at 7 snorks a rod.
Whatever that means ?

a reply to: Phage

What do you think about Hawking hawking cars now? Just saw his Jaguar ad.

I saw that ad and was 1st like " Why is he selling his soul for a jaguar? " but then at the end when he " Ha Ha Ha " at us... I was a bit pissed off, almost felt like a snub.

About this signal, we all know how the WOW! signal turned out, but this is a much different and having data to back it up.

Will be nice to see how it pans out.

Also curious if anyone has heard anything else about the possible star with the structures around it? No structures were seen, but was a theory based off signals and strength patterns.

Oh and I''d like to add ...
This is with much precaution
potentially very Awesome news...

We can probably get a good idea of what to expect from data encoded in a carrier, by studying how Voyager 1 & 2 are doing...

Voyager mission controllers still talk to or receive data from Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 every day, though the emitted signals are currently very dim, at about 23 watts — the power of a refrigerator light bulb. By the time the signals get to Earth, they are a fraction of a billion-billionth of a watt. Data from Voyager 1’s instruments are transmitted to Earth typically at 160 bits per second, and captured by 34- and 70-meter NASA Deep Space Network stations. Traveling at the speed of light, a signal from Voyager 1 takes about 17 hours to travel to Earth. After the data are transmitted to JPL and processed by the science teams, Voyager data are made publicly available.

Source=Universe Today

NASA probably knows the error rate of the data, which is backed up by V&H polarity checks and block checksums.
I could not find those stats published anywhere, but some may know where to look. They are down to a data rate of around .160k bits per second, around 16 bytes per second (including parity and checksum). Plus, the blocks are probably sent multiply redundant. Most people can type faster than this.

Given the wattage and distance, and extrapolate the error rate to what it would be if these machines were near some of the stars they are analyzing... we would get a great idea of what to expect if any of this data could be decoded at those distances. If we can see a carrier, we assume that perhaps there IS data modulated on the signal. We could probably calculate the worst case distance where nothing would be able to be decoded, and that would be great science as well.

I am sure they have done analysis like that, but could not dig any of it up. Anyone know about studies like this?

a reply to: jeep3r

Nice thread--well done!

As is mentioned in the paper, though unlikely, it could be due to exotic materials. Still, looking forward to data from the follow up survey.