United Nations Brings You ... A Telescope 122
StDave writes: "It looks like the United Nations is going to set up a SETI listening station of their own to find Extra Terrestrial Intelligence. Catch it here. " Says the article: "The £800m machine, called the Square Kilometre Array (SKA), will be the most
sensitive astronomical instrument yet built. ... An agreement to build the new telescope was signed last month at a meeting of the International Astronomical Union in Manchester. Scientists will spend the next few years designing the technology, with completion due in about 2015." I hope the aliens are at least amused.
Re:Money better spent? (Score:1)
Typical Government thinking: Why build one, when you can build two @ three thousand times the price.
By the time 2015 rolls around there will have been billions and billions of dollars spent, millions of (wo)man hours wasted on beauacracy and politics, etc etc...
but at least the UN will have bragging rights when it comes to who can outspent who... Maybe when Leonardo Dicraprio is elected president of the US in 2016 he'll up them one and sink this ship straight into the ground
Mixed Opinions About UN Telescope (Score:2)
<UL>
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
-To save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
-To reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
-To establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other
sources of international law can be maintained, and
-To promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom
</UL>
I suppose that this telescope would fall under promoting social progress. I don't see the immediate need for it though. Imediate issues like East Timor and long term issues like building infrastructure in undeveloped countries would come before a satelite, I would think.
On the other hand, this might be an expanding branch for the UN. Maybe forming a specific committee to set policies for every country's space research is something that might happen. Forming an international organization for the sole purpose of space exploration might be a possibility too.
It's anybody's guess though.
Re:Success != Signal (Score:1)
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Obviously, unless we actually find someone, or check every planet in detail, we won't get a final answer to that.
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
I'm so sick of textbook responses like yours to the mind-numbingly obvious point brought up by the original poster.
In this case I feel it is a little different to the usual space-exploration-vs-third-world-help because this is the U.N. we're talking about. In this case, *surely* they have better things to spend their money on (disclaimer: I have not read enough to know where the U.N. SETI funds are coming from, flame away).
A few dignitaries read some Carl Sagan and now they're suddenly ready to set up some pricey 'scopes and start watching "My Favorite Earthling". Bah, it's late, I don't care
Re:I hope they find something... (Score:1)
Also, what's redundant here? Redundant *across* slashdot stories? That's a new one...
No it's not. Is there something confusing about the words ... "every time someone mentions SETI (or anything related to it), some tedious cretin pops up to comment that he can't find any intelligence on slashdot."
I guess first post would be redundant under that reasoning. Or bitching about someone else's comment... Or just about anything, actually...
Oh sorry, I dropped off halfway through that. Logic chopping pedants bore me close to tears. Look, it's simple ... try to think of something funny and original (or something that hasn't been mentioned a thousand times at least) and post it. Otherwise fuck off and die,
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Can you really impose democratic government?
The Answer is No ... other than the Humans there are dolphins and elephants ... oh and some Parrots are as inteligent(reasoning+vocab) as small children
Is there a point? what an odd question, does there need to be a point? Why are we here is a different question to how did we come to exist. is there a reason that we are here, a Great Plan for Humanity ? is that what you mean ?
Re:First Contact (Score:1)
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
The best part is where the small children grow up some, pass the Parrots in intelligence, then subjugate the Parrots. Often the small children will imprison the birds in small cages. The elephants and dolphins are just slaughtered, they are too large to effectively store at home. Welcome to the real world Parrot, I 0wn j00!
Re:With absolute power comes absolute corruption. (Score:1)
Whenever I hear things like military-industrial-media complex it just makes me smile. For some reason it makes me think of a quote I enjoyed in a recent suck.com article: "With all the sweaty assurance of a faculty-lounge communist..."
Spend the money researching FTL communication (Score:2)
Planning for the right hazards (Score:1)
Sol should be good for a bout a billion years before it gets too hot for Earth's biosphere to adapt. (Yes I know the red giant stage isn't due for at least 3-4 more but Sol will be expanding slowly allthrough that time and after the billion it's estimated it'll be too hot for Earth's biota to adapt. If we actually last that long, we should be able to handle the problem when it actually becomes acute.
For right now however it's the things that can kill us off in the next century that need top priority:
1. Pollution we're making this a dirty poisoned planet and we're running out of time to rethink our habits. Not just the obvious ones like spilling oil tankers on to beaches, and dumping acid rain onto Canada, but thermal pollution as well.
2. The uggunning of the resource rush. Right now less than a quarter of Earth's population consumes 80% of the resources and fuel. How do we handle bringing more of the Third World into the 21st century? What do we do about China, for instance?
3. Spacewatch: Granted the chances of us facing something comparable to the KT event are fairly remote but we do need to finish mapping all the significant flying mountains out there. Compared to the first 2 and just about any others we can think of, it's a relatively easy task to accomplish by throwing enough resources at it without going into the red.
There are probably more but you should get my point. Rather than worrying about Humankind surviving the next million years, let's take care of the next couple of centuries first.
Re:Spend the money researching FTL communication (Score:1)
Radio is still the most practical method for SETI and will probably remain so for millenia to come.
Right now, we qualify as a unusual piece of space. A radio astronomer who happens to find earth will note at first glance a binary radio source with an unusually small mass component emitting in the radio spectrum. Our best chance at proving tthe existence of ET is too look for civilizations that are.... much like us, at least in this technological area.
Re:Is the UN the appropriate vehicle? (Score:1)
Re:Please try to think before you post. (Score:2)
I just did, and it was quite the eye-opener.
Re:Is the UN the appropriate vehicle? (Score:2)
We don't have many (much more then 5, rofl) but what we do have is extremely well trained.
As for that ship invasion, we took it back, the dispute was between two companies, not a company and the government. The ship carried millitary equiptment and refused to dock because it was trying to extort MORE money out of the second company, so we just took it.
-- iCEBaLM
Since when has SETI gotten any decent funding? (Score:1)
SETI has no money! They've been reduced to using spare CPU cycles because they don't have enough cash to get a supercomputer. Not like any of that is worth it.
Re:I hope they find something...OFF TOPIC! (Score:1)
I believe the cut and paste below is yours...is it not? And the link inserted in damn near every /. article....
Not good at counting are you fuckhead.
Yeah!
Yeah!
I know responding to you is just what you want,
Thanks man. Knobs like you make this job easy.
But just in case you have 2 pieces of grey matter to rub together..THIS BIT IS BEYOND OLD & BOREING.
Memo to loser: Chek speling in self-righteous flaymes.
Seek out new annoyances before you cast your next stone!
Coo. Pompous, stupid, windy and thinks he's profound too ... you're quite a catch. Come on man, insult me some more.
Re:Planning for the right hazards (Score:2)
All of these things may be important to some people, but are they really at the level where they affect the viability of the human race? The global population of humans currently exceeds 6 billion. Kill all you want, we'll make more.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to do something about the problems that you listed, just that they do not have the species killing potential of an asteroid impact.
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Re:(Rant) The UN: More Unresponsive Big Government (Score:1)
"At a time when the nation state is becoming irrelevant, you have to wonder why anyone would applaud the creation and maintainence of a body that really has no useful mechanism to responding to the people who are paying for it"
How ignorant a thing to say is that? Im assuming your american/canadian/british/ect.)and i want to ask you if youve EVER been to a country like Haiti? Or even the continent of africa? the middle east? Samolia? Cambodia?
Trust me, how the nation state in those parts of the world conducts its self is directly linked to your survival or death.
Technology has not changed the hopelessness of poverty, and the UN is THE forum for the introvention and comminication with such nations.
The UN will continue to be important as long as there are country's that don't look like our own.
Re:(Rant) The UN: More Unresponsive Big Government (Score:2)
These places would and will continue to suck with or without the UN.
Trust me, how the nation state in those parts of the world conducts its self is directly linked to your survival or death.
And that is exactly why the UN is unable to alter the course of these dismal places - they refuse to deal with the politics. The UN is the last agency I would want working in an area that requires drastic change, because drastic change cannot happen without someone's toes being stepped on, and the UN does not step on toes.
Technology has not changed the hopelessness of poverty, and the UN is THE forum for the introvention and comminication with such nations.
The UN has not changed the hoplessness of poverty either. If the UN was audited as a charitable organization like Care or Oxfam, their scorecard would be all F's. The amount of bureaucratic waste evident in UN operations is likely unequaled by any other aid group.
Re:A big telescope may even be useful... (Score:1)
More info. (Score:1)
Anyway it's all on their website at:
http://www.atnf.csiro.au/1kT/
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
First of all, note that I flagged half my message as a rant. That means you have to use a bit of creativity or thought to flesh out the argument--it isn't intended to be a complete philisophical proof of my views on the issue.
For instance, somebody made the witty observation, "How can you impose democracy?". That's pretty simple: ensure the elections are fair and there's no cheating/intimidating going on.
Someone else pointed out that not every third-world country is starving because of bad leadership. Of course not, I was making a generalization. What I said is true of most but not all third-world countries. Do I need to explicitly state that it's a generalization? Most of the time, when people discuss such things, they're speaking in generalizations, because including every specific case would be impossible.
Someone else pointed out that we'll never get an answer to the "are we alone" question unless we find ET. True, but the longer we look with no result, the more we learn about the parameters on intelligent life. If we were to learn that Earth-type planets are plentiful, but didn't find any ETs, that might tell us that intelligent civilizations usually destroy themselves. That would be a very valuable lesson (nice not to have to learn it the hard way).
To the poster of the meta-rant: it wasn't a textbook response--all my own (sleep-deprived) thoughts, thank you
To the person who said parrots, elephants, and dolphins are intelligent: yes, they are smarter than [insert unpopular group here], but not really at the human level. Except for dolphins (obligatory reference to Douglas Adams). All they have to do is eat and have sex...
To the person who said going in with an army is extreme: I don't know you, so I can't say for sure, but you sound very much like those hypocrits who decry military action and propose peaceful alternatives, then accuse the US of killing 200 children a day in Iraq or whatever with trade sanctions. The only acceptable method of effecting change to people like you seems to be sitting outside evil country X's embassy while chanting "Kumbaya". Can you really justify waiting a decade for some non-military method to begin to work while tens of thousands of people are dying? And about the undermining of foreign coutries: I am by no means justifying it, but it mostly happened as part of the Cold War. I think the CIA's days of messing with two-bit governments are over. We now have to deal with the aftermath, and whining about how it got that way won't help.
To the person blaming everything on evil "rich" countries holding third-world debt. You are free to pay off someone else's debt if you choose--have you helped them at all?\ Nobody made them buy weapons from us. If I spent all my money buying guns, then filed for bankrupcy and expected not to have to pay back the $1000 I owed you, you would rightly call me an idiot and an asshole. Only idiot/asshole governments would get a country into such a situation, hence the need to fix the government.
To the person who pointed out that there are homeless and starving people in every country, including the US. Yes, and throwing more money at them won't make the problem go away. If you took all the money the US spends on social assistance and social programs, and just gave it to poor people, there wouldn't be a single person in the US below the poverty line. Now explain to me why there's still a poverty problem, and how more money would make that problem go away. I don't know how to fix it, but I do know more money is not the answer. We might as well spend the cash on something that has a hope of succeeding.
Rectal probe (Score:1)
Re:Planning for the right hazards (Score:1)
Double Wonder ! (Score:1)
Now We'll have to managed a double-wonder, I wonder if it will take twice a many shields to build it...
With absolute power comes absolute corruption. (Score:2)
Although another poster has dealt with the factual rebuttal of your insincerly idiotic comment, I feel I must provide the moral rebuttal.
Your flippant attitude just gives away the fact that this seemingly innocent factual faux pas is indeed part of a deliberate slander campaign against the organizations like the UN, that oppose, albeit timidly, the arrogant, merciless power of today's world: the military-industrial-media complex of the inadequately named United States of America.
The telescope will (at least theoretically) be looking for other planets, not just intelligent life. Finding other (possibly human-habitable) planets is a good long term goal. It should make the paranoid (who think that earth will not survive mankind) happy.
I'll be accused of repeating myself here, but I'll say this once more: imagine that, in the year 3,000, an alien civilization were to happen upon the ruins of personkind, which had disappeared hundreds of years before, due to the consumption of all their available energy sources. They explore and research this barren planet, with its countless artifacts of civilization gone, and discover and decipher this one particular phenomenon: SETI. What would you, as one of these alien anthropologists, say? "They claimed to care for life, and to value the possibility of life in other worlds. But this claim was empty, as is evidenced by how they failed to apply those resources to discovering that the love of life must start locally, and only after it conquers the local can it conquer the remote."
"Professor Peter Wilkinson, a senior astronomer at Jodrell Bank, Britain's renowned radio telescope centre, said that the SKA could enable humanity to protect itself from [asteriod's] impact." That should make the common man (not to mention the politicos) happy.
Quoth your hypothetical "common man": "Yeah, now we can go back to worrying about whether we'll die nuked."
Quoth your "politicos": "Good, back to oppressing the masses. What do we privatize next? The police, right?"
Re:Wasn't there a bigger one in the works? (Score:1)
Re:...And they're calling it "SKA"? (Score:1)
they are pop-ska at best - True Ska kicks ass
especially if you smoke weed.
(or so ive heard)
Re:It's good that they're building it in Australia (Score:1)
Now I'm confused... (Score:2)
The only logical conculssion so far for my conspiratory mind is that they know exactly what they'll be looking for...maybe they know more than we do about alien life???
Re:Better use of funds (Score:3)
I'm so sick of hearing the "when people are starving in country Z, how can we justify spending Y on X" argument. People are starving because their governments are fucked up. You can spend all the money you want on foreign aid, but it will just go to feeding the military and lining the pockets of the dictators in those countries.
The only real solution would be to go in with an army, kill/imprison the dictators, impose a democratic government, occupy the country for the 20 years it took for things to settle down, and then hope that they got their shit together. A hell of a lot of people--both us and them--would die in the effort.
Would you give your life for that?
***/RANT***
That being said, money spent on SETI is NOT wasted. It advances our society as a whole by answering an incredibly deep question about our universe: are we alone?
If all we ever manage to accomplish as a species is to pollute the planet and feed ourselves for a while before the next big comet hits, well, we just plain suck. If we never pass on parts of our knowledge or culture to other civilizations, is there any point to our existence as a species?
Imagine if someone had told Columbus he was an asshole for going off on his little trip when people were starving in Europe. Exploration is vital to the advancement of human society. (Please don't get anal on me and point out how so-and-so actually discovered North America first, or how Columbus was really looking for the North-West passage to the nearest Indo-Chinese Fusion Cuisine restaurant--it's irrelevant).
I have probably just been trolled here, but what the hell, it's late, I don't care.
Re:seti is NOT the main reason for the SKA. (Score:1)
Bzzz. Wrong. Typical american inward looking attitude. The VLBA (Very Large Baseline ARRAY) does VLBI (Very LONG Baseline Interferometry) combined with the European VLBI Network (EVN) to make a telescope the size of the Earths diameter. But even this is not good enough, the Japanese VSOP project does VLBI between Earth based telescopes and a radio telescope in orbit.
http://www.jive.nl/jive/evn [www.jive.nl]
http://www.vsop.isas.ac.jp [isas.ac.jp]
Re:Rectal probe (Score:1)
Re:...and it all goes downhill from here on (Score:2)
/.
Re:hmmm (Score:1)
Shush! Shut up! How the heck do you think such an instrument will get funding if it's not approved by the general public... Oh... you really thought this thing is going to be build to conduct (only) extraterrestrial intelligence searches...
Re:Rectal probe (Score:1)
Recognition that ET mostlikely exists. (Score:2)
UN involvement is normal...: (Score:5)
Organizarion such as ESA (The European Space Agency) are also listed by the UN, and a UN treaty between the member countries does exists at the UN. The UN itself does not contribute to ESA. You can find more information about this sort of things, which happen often in astronomy were costs are high and international cooperations are mandatory, by looking up the internet registration of the .int domain name.
I too was surprised a while ago to find out that I needed a copy of a UN agreement in order to register a .int domain, and that places like www.esa.int HAD such a treaty. I had forgotten, as many seem to, that the UN is THE place where international agreements can be ironed out officially.
First Contact (Score:1)
"Scientists aim to create a "radio quiet park", where nobody will be allowed to use mobile phones, TV, radio or walkie-talkies for fear their emissions could be mistaken for signs of alien life. The most likely site is in Australia."
I would hate to see the newsflash saying that first contact with an intelligent race of life from somehwere outside our own earth would sound like:
"Honey, don't forget to pickip johnny at practice."
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Besides, the whole "science is stupid when people are starving" argument has been proven on countless occasions to be invalid.
---
which bureaucracy? (Score:1)
US, Europe, and Japan...
all famed for their efficient, cost-effective bureaucracies...
much better.
Wasn't there a bigger one in the works? (Score:2)
http://www.chron.com/content/interactive/space/as
http://www.cnn.com/20 00/TECH/space/08/01/seti.telescope.reut/ [cnn.com]
http://srd.yahoo.com/goo/paul+allen+telescope/3/*
How does that one fit in?
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is"
The REAL Value of This Telescope (Score:3)
This would be sufficient to collect information on atospheric composition, temperature and the presence of life. (Dead atmospheres are comparitively inert to those needed for living matter.)
Even if no ET signal was ever detected by this giant telescope, it would be capable of mapping virtually every solar system within that 100 LY range, AND give a fairly good indication of the prevalence of living matter.
IMHO, focussing on that side of things is far more interesting than whether you'll be able to decode ET's "Playbeing" channel.
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
It's good that they're building it in Australia... (Score:1)
The best radio telescopes right now are primarily situated in the Northern hemisphere. VLA, Arecibo, that new one Senator Byrd bought. . . all of them are scanning the Northern skies. My impression is that the Southern skies have been relatively ignored. It's also nice that there are still areas in Auzzieland that are almost unpopulated (making the cellphone ban workable).
uhhhhhhhhhh. (Score:1)
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
<SARCASM>Well, it's simple, it's because the ET's aren't doing anything to feed our millions of hungry or develop the undeveloped world. I mean, there they are up there, building their intergalactic spaceships, for themselves, in an orgy of greed, without any concern for the rights of the space dust their ships blast aside, probably spending 17-figure sums on the things, while people are down here starving. Shame on them! If those ET's exist, they owe us!</SARCASM>
-- Sunlighter
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Ah, democracy... (Score:1)
What's even worse is when you send our military down there, imprison the dictators, disable their military, impose a democratic government, guarantee a fraud-free election, let the people vote... and they vote for the same damn dictators again.
Some people never learn.
-- Sunlighter
first step (Score:1)
--
Was Bill Gates right? (Score:1)
hmmm (Score:2)
To be honest, I'm not really sure what that comment meant...
But anyway, it's nice to see a real large scale SETI operation like this. Even if there isn't intelligent life out there transmitting, which is entirely possible, I'm sure astronomers can think of other uses for something the article referred to as being "the most sensitive astronomical instrument yet built".
--
Money better spent (Score:1)
Instead of searching, why not colonize? (Score:1)
Re:A big telescope may even be useful... (Score:1)
This merits a reply. Start with the World Food Program, which provides subsistence meals to people who would otherwise starve to death. You can donate meals for free (corporate sponsor pays) at http://www.thehungersite.com
Next time you ask a question like that, you might first ask yourself when you last saved someone from starving to death.
Re:Money better spent? (Score:2)
Although I am amused/puzzled by something. They're designing something *now* for implementation in 2015. By the time it is in place, it'll be long obsolete!
An uncharted subject... (Score:1)
"Radio-frequecny disturbances", eh? Why dont we try syncing some downtime of terrestrial-orbit satellites with SETI data extraction, a sort of "share the sky" principle... I know it is near impossible to halt the satellites, however it would be nice to keep their transmission to an idle..
Therefore we could clean up the data to be processed.
Publicity stunt? (Score:2)
More SETI telescopes are great and all, but wouldn't it be nice of the SETI project had more cohesion than the Reform Party [reformparty.org]?
Kevin Fox
A big telescope may even be useful... (Score:4)
The telescope will (at least theoretically) be looking for other planets, not just intelligent life. Finding other (possibly human-habitable) planets is a good long term goal. It should make the paranoid (who think that earth will not survive mankind) happy.
It's also supposed to be useful to seek the faint radiation emitted 10-12 billion years ago when the first stars and galaxies formed after the big bang. That should make scientist happy.
But I bet the telescope was sold to the UN by the theory that "it will also allow astronomers to plot in detail the courses of asteroids and comets that threaten to collide with the Earth. Professor Peter Wilkinson, a senior astronomer at Jodrell Bank, Britain's renowned radio telescope centre, said that the SKA could enable humanity to protect itself from their impact." That should make the common man (not to mention the politicos) happy.
So, everyone is happy...
Thalia
Re:I hope they find something... (Score:1)
Also, what's redundant here? Redundant *across* slashdot stories? That's a new one... I guess first post would be redundant under that reasoning. Or bitching about someone else's comment... Or just about anything, actually...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Good for them! (Score:1)
Stefan.
It takes a lot of brains to enjoy satire, humor and wit-
Re:Money better spent (Score:2)
Single Female Lawyer (Score:3)
Re:This is misinformation (Score:1)
I can't wait until the UN imposes the one world government. When that happens conspiracy idiots like you will be the first to die.
(sarchasm/flame off)
Who better to talk to ET (Score:3)
Who better than the UN to represent humanity when we first make contact with another (or perhaps "an") intelligent species? Isn't part of the UN's mandate to bring everyone together for peaceful and meaningful discussions? Why shouldn't that include ETs?
Also, the project has a heck of a lot of other goals. I'm not sure if asteroid detection is one of them, but, if it is, it's worth considering that a decent-sized asteroid hitting Earth would make full-scale nuclear war look like wet firecrackers...
The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program.
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Success != Signal (Score:2)
If there isn't anything out there, we need to know that, too.
Finding something isn't the only measure of success for SETI.
-
Re:Put it on the moon. (Score:1)
Perhaps in 20-50 years once cheap energy and good old capitalist competition have made access to space nice and affordable.
--
Give me a break...! (Score:1)
Re:A big telescope may even be useful... (Score:1)
If statistics give us a few thousand years, then we might make it. But the hard reality is that our Sun _will_ eventually blow and destroy Earth. (Yes, that's a long ways in the future, but it _will_ eventually happen, and we should plan to survive that event.)
Re:With absolute power comes absolute corruption. (Score:1)
This will rate a "Flamebait" or other negative karma, but I don't care.
Go back to smoking bad crack or guzzling booze, either/both of which may have inspired your post.
Better yet, just pass out...
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
The Answer is No ... other than the Humans there are dolphins and elephants ... oh and some Parrots are as inteligent(reasoning+vocab) as small children
No, you're wrong. It's humans, dolphins and mice.
--
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
...................................
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Boy, you sure are in the dark about the UN aren't you?
Re:Mixed Opinions About UN Telescope (Score:1)
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Isn't that a defining characteristic of the dictatorships themselves? I don't think you can impose a democratic government; that's not the democratic way of doing things ... just a thought.
-Forager
Straight from the IAU (Score:3)
From the article:
The International Astronomical Union [iau.org] has a page providing information on this: here [iau.org].
Re:With absolute power comes absolute corruption. (Score:1)
--
UNIT to operate SETI Telescope (Score:1)
Re:Typical godless UN... (offtopic) (Score:1)
Oh man, have you read the editorials? Here is a piece from a rant against the First Amendment that is just so ironic:
Whoops, looks like I broke his license agreement [tencommandments.org]. The fool seems to think a publisher can force his readers to waive their "fair us" [sic] rights.
Re:Planning for the right hazards (Score:1)
Ok, ill kill 6 Billion and 1, now try to make more
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Re:Better use of funds (Score:1)
Re:A big telescope may even be useful... (Score:3)
I am going to include the obligatory link to the science goals [ucalgary.ca] of the square kilometer array. If you read the outline, you will see that SETI is only one of many. In fact, this is the first I had heard of using the SKA to do SETI. Most people talk about 21 cm studies out to high redshift, not LGMs....
The IAU is not the UN. (Score:3)
The International Astronomical Union [iau.org] has been around since 1919, well predating the UN, and is headquartered in Brussels. While it's a member of the International Council of Scientific Unions, as far as I can tell, they have nothing to do with the United Nations. Well, OK, they're working with the ITU (which does) and the UN working group on peaceful uses of outer space, but neither of those institutional connections impacts the separate SKA working group. There are many international organizations that operate wholly independently of the UN.
While the SKA project [ucalgary.ca] is still a ways from reaching the point of a firm technical plan and seeking funding, there's no evidence they're going to ask the UN for money. In fact, a lot of the funding is likely to come from participating universities (who may in turn, of course, seek grants from their national governments to support their involvement). No UN bureaucracy at all.
The moral? Don't believe everything you read in the papers. Looks to me like the editor saw "International [Astronomical] Union" and assumed it was a UN agency. Not the case.
----
Re:A big telescope may even be useful... (Score:5)
And I probably missed some.
--
Ooops. Sorry, try these: (Score:2)
Africa Initiative [un.org]
Ageing [un.org]
Agriculture [un.org]
Atomic Energy [un.org]
Children [un.org]
Climate Change [un.org]
Culture [un.org]
Decolonization [un.org]
Demining [un.org]
Development [un.org]
Cooperation
Persons with [un.org]
disabilities
Disarmament [un.org]
Drug control [un.org]
& Crime Prevention
Education [un.org]
Elections [un.org]
Energy [un.org]
Environment [un.org]
Family [un.org]
Food [slashdot.org]
Governance [un.org]
Habitat [un.org]
Health [un.org]
Human Rights [un.org]
Humanitarian Affairs [un.org]
Indigenous People [un.org]
Intellectual Property [un.org]
International [un.org]
Finance
Labour [un.org]
International Law [un.org]
Law of the Sea [un.org]
& Antartica
Least Developed [un.org]
Countries
Question of [un.org]
Palestine
Peace [un.org]
& Security
Population [un.org]
Refugees [un.org]
Social Development [un.org]
Outer Space [un.org]
Statistics [un.org]
Sustainable [un.org]
Development
Trade & [un.org]
Development
Volunteerism [un.org]
Women [un.org]
Youth [un.org]
Re:Better use of funds (Score:2)
this might be the truth for the vast number of third world countries, but there are lots of third world countries that have good leaders but ppl are still starving. (there are numerous reasons why ppl are starving there; everything from low incomes because of western corporations are not willing to pay more than few $/hour to low prices on worlds market for raw materials country is exporting)
now we should not use these countries as excuse for not persuing space exploration. we can both explore space and help those ppl. imo problem is that people/govermants in europe/n. america are spending money on useless stuff.
Re:Is the UN the appropriate vehicle? (Score:2)
Canada has been footing the US's UN dues since the US seems to be refusing to pay them for quite some time...
-- iCEBaLM
...And Jill Tarter will be played by Jodie Foster (Score:2)
Syndy, Australia, 2018 -- In a surprising discovery, Dr. Jill Tarter announced through her thumb-sucking male boss, who likes to hog the credit, that "they are out there." Interlaced with the bursts of RF energy that become the first 10 prime numbers when "interpreted properly", the ETs show they are watching us by inserting a subcarrier that carries a rebroadcat of the Nixon "I Am Not A Crook" speech.
Further embedded in those signals (you'd be amazed what can be packed into those 150-ms pulses when you try!) is the construction plans for the ship Heart of Gold with its Infinite Improbability Drive, designed by the aliens when they received the BBC Radio broadcasts of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and mistook the radio play for a news broadcast.
The United Nations has retained Scott Adams to oversee the entire "Contact For Real" project because of his clearly superior grasp of management techniques and practices. Douglas Adams has been added to the project team for his ability to brew really hot cups of tea, as well has his clearly superior ability to deal with the side effects of the Heart of Gold's drive.
Co-operation has been rampent in this project. Recluse trillionare Bill Gates, from his private space station, pointed out that the space-borne construction diagrams make sense when wrapped around a model of the United States Pentegon building. Arch-rivel Steve Jobs, from his offices at Pixar/Disney, demonstrated using computer graphics generated by 4,000 Apple G6 computers connected via kite string and Dixie cups, that the diagrams made even more sense when stretched across a model of the Pentagon expanded into a three-dimensional model. Tom Clancy observed that a portion of the drawing is in error, in that it looks like some prankster grafted a giant hypodermic needle that would be used to kill The Galactic Overlord's giant space amoeba as described in the Hazel Stone space-opera series The Scourge of the Spaceways.
(more)
Without pure research..... (Score:2)
(Rant) The UN: More Unresponsive Big Government (Score:2)
Think Washington is unresponsive to you? Try New York. Although he is a repugnant geezer, Jesse Helms is correct in deriding the UN - its a completely meaningless debate society that has done almost nothing to really alter the course of world events throughout its history.
At a time when the nation state is becoming irrelevant, you have to wonder why anyone would applaud the creation and maintainence of a body that really has no useful mechanism to responding to the people who are paying for it - it is a grossly elitist body that has absolutely no mandate to listen to any individuals, because it has no constituency. It has no democratic foundations at all.
Push power down to individuals and local governments. Screw Big Brother.
Please, the UN is a farce (Score:3)
While they are arguably making an effort to deliver the goods on these needs, they can't address the political issues that keep food and medicine out of the areas needed (newsflash - most of the barriers to aid are political, not economic - see 80s Ethiopian famine for a case study).
Why can't they address the political issues? The UN thinks it is above such things. This is why they are locked out of most of the useful change in developing nations.
Peacekeeping.
I'm tempted to enter a "ROTFL", but seriosuly, the UN does little to keep or create peace - mostly it puts its own soldiers in harm's way with no mandate whatsoever. As a peacekeeper, the UN is a complete failure.
Providing a forum for international diplomacy.
Sure - it creates elitist bodies that are answerable to no one, as they have no visible constituency. There is no real representation in any UN organization - its a loose thread of pseudo socialist ideals implemented by lifelong empolyees who respond to no one and have no notion of democratic accountability.
Its amazing that people think of this collection of appointed dupes as the ruling ideal - at the very best it stinks of a second-world planned-economy style operation that completely defies any efforts to further empower individuals over institutions.
More pseudo-intellectual mumbo jumbo (Score:2)
Haha, nice pseudo-intellectual rant. Thank the gods that the twentieth century taught us to never trust rule to intellectuals again. Now lets get to the facts - the UN is not anti-American as you naively claim, in fact, they are the lapdog of the US. Look at the resolutions passed around the time of the Gulf War. The fact that they continue to curry favor with the US is even more amazing in light of the fact that the US regularly fails to pay its UN dues.
As for "military industrial complex", please tell me how the absurdly elitist, unresponsive, undemocratic, unaccountable UN is supposed to be an improvement over the corporate state?? You're replacing one big brother with another.
Re:With absolute power comes absolute corruption. (Score:2)
You do realize the term was first used by Dwight Eisenhower? I don't think anyone would consider him a "faculty-lounge communist"...
--
Is the UN the appropriate vehicle? (Score:3)
Re:Please, the UN is a farce (Score:5)
They have problems addressing the political issues because their actions are done through consensus, which is very hard to get in the international community.
Why can't they address the political issues? The UN thinks it is above such things. This is why they are locked out of most of the useful change in developing nations.
The UN has trouble with the political issues because the member states want it that way.
I'm tempted to enter a "ROTFL", but seriosuly, the UN does little to keep or create peace - mostly it puts its own soldiers in harm's way with no mandate whatsoever. As a peacekeeper, the UN is a complete failure.
UN peacekeeping failures get a lot of press; successes don't. Check here [un.org] for a listing of what they've accomplished. In my opinion, even if they don't succeed in a mission, I think it's important to have tried.
Sure - it creates elitist bodies that are answerable to no one, as they have no visible constituency. There is no real representation in any UN organization - its a loose thread of pseudo socialist ideals implemented by lifelong empolyees who respond to no one and have no notion of democratic accountability.
The UN's power rests partially with the general assembly, and mostly with the security council. Representatives are ambassadors; their job is to represent their own countries interests, and the bureacracies answer to them. Their budgets are at the mercy of the member states, and in general they're severely underfunded.
Its amazing that people think of this collection of appointed dupes as the ruling ideal - at the very best it stinks of a second-world planned-economy style operation that completely defies any efforts to further empower individuals over institutions.
The UN isn't meant to be a ruling body, and nobody, myself included, thinks it's any sort of ideal. What it is is simply two things; a forum for different nations to interact with each other, and a collection of what are essentially humanitarian agencies administered by it. The total amount of money spent by the UN to maintain itself and run it's operations is around 10 billion a year. This is less than half the budget of it's host city of New York. Last year a little over a dollar of your taxes (assuming you're an American) went to it. Money from the UN that enters the American economy (through expenditures, employees, etc) is more than what we spend on it. Personally, I think the work that the WHO and UNICEF does is worth that dollar a year by themselves.
--