News Proof of Aliens Could Come Within 25 Years, Scientist Says

Turbinator

New member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
1,145
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tellurian
SANTA CLARA, Calif. -- Proof of extraterrestrial intelligence could come within 25 years, an astronomer who works on the search said Sunday.

"I actually think the chances that we'll find ET are pretty good," said Seth Shostak, senior astronomer at the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute in Mountain View, Calif., here at the SETI con convention . "Young people in the audience, I think there's a really good chance you're going to see this happen."

Shostak bases this estimation on the Drake Equation , a formula conceived by SETI pioneer Frank Drake to calculate the number (N) of alien civilizations with whom we might be able to communicate. That equation takes into account a variety of factors, including the rate of star formation in the galaxy, the fraction of stars that have planets, the fraction of planets that are habitable, the percent of those that actually develop life, the percent of those that develop intelligent life, the fraction of civilizations that have a technology that can broadcast their presence into space, and the length of time those signals would be broadcasted.

Reliable figures for many of those factors are not known, but some of the leaders in the field of SETI have put together their best guesses. Late great astronomer Carl Sagan, another SETI pioneer, estimated that the Drake Equation amounted to N = 1 million. Scientist and science fiction writer Isaac Asimov calculated 670,000. Drake himself estimates a more conservative 10,000.

But even if that lower value turns out to be correct, at the rate they're going, it wouldn't take scientists too long to discover an alien signal, Shostak said.

"This range, from Sagan's million down to 10,000 – that's the range of estimates from people who have started and worked on SETI," said Shostak. "These people may know what they're talking about. If they do, then the point is we trip across somebody in the next several dozen or two dozen years."

The SETI quest is set to take a leap forward when the Allen Telescope Array, a network of radio dishes under construction in northern California, is fully operational. By 2015, the array should be able to scan hundreds of thousands of stars for signs of extraterrestrial intelligence, Shostak said.

But while humans might be able to discover an alien signal within that timeframe, interpreting what ET is trying to tell us could take much, much longer.

Shostak admitted such a task would be very difficult. An alien civilization may be as technologically advanced compared to us as Homo sapiens are to our hominid relatives Neanderthals . <[> "We could give our digital television signals to the Neanderthals, and they'll never figure it out. And they're not stupid," he said.

Yet simply having proof that we are not alone in the universe would likely be a world-changing achievement, Shostak added.

Source: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/yahoocan...ens_could_come_within25_years__scientist_says

ATA350-render.jpg
 
intal.jpg


Neither could I. ;)
 
:rofl:
Even if we did find E.T. how would we communicate without the many years it could take for radio signals to reach them? I say we build quantum radios. We'll be able to broadcast information quickly and people on a mission to mars will have quicker internet.

Now if only we could quantum teleport the state of a particle over millions of kilometers. :hmm:
 
Are you sure that they are not already here? http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=80

Seriously though, scientists have been talking about the "big breakthrough" and "proof of aliens" for years. The problem is it's not possible to conclusively prove if aliens exist simply by picking up a radio signal. They made that mistake with Pulsars.

Pointing a radio telescope and the sky and listening won't find aliens. You need to pick the area of the sky you want to listen to and he frequencies you want to use.

The larger the area of sky the less frequencies you can listen for, the more frequencies you want to listen for the smaller the area of sky you can scan.

Then there is the problem of radio itself. Look at Earth, As technology improves our radio leakage drops to near zero so if there is a real, live alien civilisation out there and they follow the same technological path as us (which isn't guaranteed) then there is a window of 50 years or so for them to be detectable by radio.

So you'll need to excuse my skeptisim about finding aliens via a radio signal.
 
Data-free predictions - every scientist's favourable hobby ...

It strikes me that such a large variation in estimates for N clearly means that nobody really has a clue... thus proving your point :-)
 
It strikes me that such a large variation in estimates for N clearly means that nobody really has a clue... thus proving your point :-)

How can they have a clue? Any assumptions are made on guessing the motives of something that is, by it's very definition, alien.
 
In my opinion, the chances of us actually ever meeting sentient alien life are almost nill. This is because of a few things:

1) it would take over 11 years (traveling at the speed of light) to reach the nearest known exoplanet. It would take over 20 years to reach the nearest (possibly) habitable planet. And that's at the speed of light. Interstellar travel is simply not practical with anything near our current level of technology.
2) The same goes for signals from other planets. (This could be circumvented by quantum physics but since almost the entire science of quantum physics is still theoretical, quantum technology is not going to be around for a while.
3) What are the chances that the species we contact would no how to interpret our message and then respond to it? (And even if they do, one of our species might be dead by the time the signal reaches us.)

That being said, I think it is almost certain that we will find at least microbiotic life outside our planet. Perhaps even on Titan, Europa, or Encelaus.
 
intelligent civilizations? really? where? - as far as i see it, INCLUDING ourselves, N is still reading zero :rolleyes:
 
well... EVERYTHING uses quantum-physics effects... it IS the very thing that we're all made of :rolleyes:
another thing is to bring it under our conscious control and manipulate it to our advantage/entertainment :hmm:

that's a bit harder, i guess:P
 
This could be circumvented by quantum physics but since almost the entire science of quantum physics is still theoretical, quantum technology is not going to be around for a while.

99% percent of quantum physics is actually not "still theoretical" but deep down to practical applications (Lasers, Semiconductors, quantum encryption, nuclear technology). It is just the remaining 1% that make people say something so stupid like "quantum physics is still theoretical".

Of course quantum physics are no hard science as in "This neutrino will now move there". It is a heuristically calculated approximation for large numbers of particles. Out of x particles, y will do that, z will do something else and m disappear into photons. It is not the same kind of physics as you expect from larger scales, but it is at the same time not less accurate. It is the best known information.

My personal best example of how quantum physics work, is the Congress lunch break example: At lunch, a large number of congress men decide to meet in a small bar in Washington. You know when they leave the congress and when they will be at the bar. Quantum physics is now being able to tell what happens in between congress and bar. If you select a crossroad between bar and congress, how many congressmen will pass there during the time period? Such kind of things is quantum physics.

---------- Post added at 05:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:51 PM ----------

Touch screen uses quantum tunneling.

And CMOS chips rely on quantum states for operation. And thermonuclear bombs wouldn't work without quantum effects.
 
Yeah, the problem with the Drake equation is that if you don't know all the variables, you can't really get an answer. You might be able to get R and possibly Fp, but the rest are a complete guess. And even those are suspect. Our planet detection methods are still pretty primitive, we can't really detect Earth mass or smaller yet. Without that ability, we're missing a big part of what actually happens in planet formation.

It is probably possible to communicate via radio waves, using a thing called a radioglyph. It is a binary transmission in the form of a semi-prime; it can be assembled into a simple image that can be used to transmit information. Over time, this could allow instructions for say, decoding JPEG files, which could allow for a whole wealth of data to be transmitted. See the Future Language section of Atomic Rockets. Of course, if you can't for some reason decipher what all the simple shapes mean, it won't work very well.
 
Interesting tidbit on wikipedia re. Drake equation:

Another reply to such criticisms is that the Drake Equation is a Fermi Problem which involves the multiplication of several estimated factors, and such calculations (e.g. the number of piano tuners in Chicago) will _probably_ be more accurate than might be first supposed (assuming that there is no consistent bias in the estimated factors). This is because if there is no consistent bias, then there will probably (with a binomial distribution) be some factors that are estimated too high and other factors that are estimated too low, and such errors will partially cancel each other out.
Excuse me? Does that mean that by adding more and more "unbiased" unknown factors, I get a better and better approximation to the truth, because the errors increasingly cancel each other? Isn't the fact that the inserted values are most likely wrong a bias in itself? After all, we are not only guessing the values, but also their distribution (where do they get their assumption of a binomial distribution from?). And what does "might be first supposed" mean? A rather happy-go-lucky approach to error propagation.
 
Excuse me? Does that mean that by adding more and more "unbiased" unknown factors, I get a better and better approximation to the truth, because the errors increasingly cancel each other?

Yes, that is absurd logic. False AND False is true. ;)
 
How do we know for certain that we haven't already been visited............
(Laugh all you want).
The bible for instance is full of references of the gods coming down from heaven and speaking to us;take a look at the passage were Moses is on the mountain top and gets handed down the 10 commandments.

I'm a strong believer in the fact that we have already been visited but our limited intellect at the time viewed these visitations as "Gods coming down from heaven".

Just my personal opinion................. feel free to poke fun at it all you want :cheers:
 
Back
Top