
SETI@home Explained, From Inside 121
eheien writes: "The IEEE currently has an article detailing SETI@home, written by the project founders. The article goes into a great deal of detail on how SETI@home works, how sensitive the search is to signals (it can detect a cell phone on Saturn's moons), how successful it has been, and so on." It's a good read, and has some impressive numbers about the project that most SETI@home participants may not have realized.
seti was fun. (Score:2)
about the time i hit 1000 data packets processed, i learned that they were accepting money from the co founder of microsoft.
that's a little like taking maney from organized crime...so i pulled the plug/couldn't care less now.
but it was interesting to learn how to set up all the boxes, diald, etc., plus there was always the hope of something significant happening.
i checked over at distributed.net but it was looking pretty yawnish, and california was getting hit with a heat wave and was dipping low into the barrel, so i just packed it up.
if something interesting for distributed stuff comes up again, and energy sanity has returned to california, i might be interested in bringing everything back up.
And the first Alien Message received by SETI is... (Score:2)
What? (Score:1)
No offense to the guys at Seti@Home, but wouldn't success mean the detection of a extra terestrial signal?
---
I think so (Score:1)
And on top of that, what can we learn from the signal we may detect? What does the signal contain? It's exciting!
Re:frequencies (Score:2)
Re:Future headline (Score:1)
If you meant something else..."never mind"
---- Sigs are bad for your health ----
Gravity waves (Score:1)
Re:Social experimentation. (Score:2)
I will stick to what is harmless and could give me money
No dorky clubs for me where I compare how much CPU time I wasted going to a program
Re:frequencies (Score:2)
As to composite signals from several stars: yeah, right. Composite signals from two or more places converge into intelligent signals in at the most one place. It is a fair bet that lifeform capable of sending interstellar signals know some basic geometry. Setting that place to be earth would make no sense unless they knew that we are here and were only trying to reach us.
Even if we could only detect one part of this "composite" signal it would still definetly be irregular enough to qualify it as an alien communication. This is essentially what seti@home is looking for. It is not trying to decode anything, just detecting irregularities that might implicate intelligence..
Non-consecutive frequencies? What does that have to do with anything. Seti@home picks frequency bands and distributes those as chunks to work on. If someone should happen to send a signal modulated at a frequency higher than half of the bandwidth of those chunks it would not really matter! It would create a sideband and only this sideband would show at some other chunk. This would definetly be an irregularity that sets off all kinds of alarms and people would start to investigate more.
How the hypothetical aliens encode their message is totally irrelevant to seti@home. If there is a transmission method besides modulation of electromagnetic radiation it is also irrelevant to seti@home. If, however, this transmission can be received with a radio telescope it is more than likely that seti@home will catch it. Even if it catches only a part of some wierd pattern it is enough. We don't need to know more than a fraction of the message to know that something is being sent and for this seti@home is more than well equipped!
Re:Is seti@home real? (Score:1)
I quit running data processing stuff as soon as I began to overclock heavily. My machine needs its rest!
Assumed Frequency of Transmission (Score:2)
The SETI project makes an assumption that because Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the Universe it follows that a transmission from another species would necessarily be at that frequency. The other species would choose to transmit on the frequency that is most likely to be listened to. Although this assumption may make sense to us, it does not necessarily follow that it will make sense to another sentient life form on another planet. It is essentially attempting to predict the behavior of a species about which we know nothing other than they are sentient and have developed technology.
We must consider the possibility that another species would choose to broadcast on another frequency. The reasons for choosing another frequency may be cosmologically or mathematically significant. That is, since we do not have a complete theory of the everything (unified theory), we may not yet recognize that there would be a better frequency for broadcasting. One that would be the most obvious choice to a species that had already developed a unified theory. Therefore SETI may be looking at the wrong frequency.
Another siginificant issue is the power required to send the transmission any significant distance in Galactic terms. I won't get into that (because I can't remember the stats of the top of my head) but suffice it to say, that it would require many more times the power generated on earth every day.
rrr (Score:1)
s/intercity/intensity
Damn spellchecker...
Re:Is seti@home real? (Score:1)
Re:Eighth post! (Score:1)
Re:seti was fun. (Score:1)
Re:Gravity waves (Score:1)
Of course, "gravity waves" is an arguable concept in and of itself.
Re:A cellphone on saturn's moons (Score:1)
Re:Future headline (Score:2)
Re:is this really worth it? (Score:1)
One big problem is that we've only been emitting radio signals ourselves for the past 100 years. An alien civilisation would have to be at a *very* similar stage to ours to pick us up (or vice versa). How many are we missing because they don't use those old-fashioned radio waves, or haven't invented them yet?
Re:That's it then! (Score:1)
Dammit, I knew I shouldn't have made that call.
They're sure to find us now...
That's it then! (Score:3)
Hang on, the only way to be sure of this is to have tested the hypothesis. That means they're picking up cell calls on Saturn's moons. Doesn't this strike anybody else as being perhaps odd? I know Vodafone are on a campagin of world domination, but I didn't know they had bought out telcos out there!
You miss the obvious (Score:1)
Mind you I am speaking on technical merits only, ET is merely a human manifestation of the need for hope that there is something better out there. The new religion if you will.
Re:are WE transmitting at 1450 Mhz? (Score:1)
There is some concern as to who might answer such a transmission. Would the Vulcans come by for a drink as in Star Trek, would the Babylon 5 Vorlons stop by for some new DNA samples, or would Damon Knight's Kanamits show up?
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV. - Me
Could the aliens hear us? (Score:1)
Re:are WE transmitting at 1450 Mhz? (Score:1)
Except possibly for some, low power, illicit, transmissions, we've never transmitted on the hydrogen line.
I think you may be thinking of the Encounter 2001 transmissions [cmu.edu] (science URL given, not the commercial one [encounter2001.com]). These used 5,010.024 Mhz.
The much earlier one, from Arecibo, was somewhere around 2,250 MHz, although I cannot find a reference to positively confirm that just now.
These frequencies are chosen because they are the frequencies of existing planetary radar transmitters, and, in turn, might represent frequencies near military radar frequencies; they were not chosen because of any likely significance to ET.
The Arecibo message was sent to the (historic) position of a globular cluster (M13) in our own galaxy. The Encounter 2001 messges were sent to the (proper motion and light time corrected) locations of relatively close stars.
Re:And the first Alien Message received by SETI is (Score:1)
"ME TOO!" (likely posted by a Sirius On-Line customer)
-LjM
Ionospheric Center’s 305 meter telescope (Score:1)
Figure 1. SETI@home uses the National Astronomy and Ionospheric Center's 305 meter telescope at Arecibo, Puerto Rico.
Now wouldn't HAARP's efforts directly effect this type of technology??
Re:communication (Score:1)
That's a pretty big "if". Gigantic in fact.
That means they definitely are NOT communicating via radio waves.
Well, it depends. If you are *deliberately* trying to communicate with a civilization on a lower rung of the technology ladder, you don't send your message by subspace parcel post; you send it in some way that the receiver can, well, receive.
Terrestrial Intelligence? (Score:1)
And here I was, thinking there was no such thing as terrestrial intelligence...
Future headline (Score:4)
After burning through approximately 2.12E678 CPU hours of computer time in over three centuries of existence, SETI@Home is finally calling it quits.
Their search for extraterrestrials has foundered, producing only a few candidate signals per year, none of which has ever been proven to be of extraterrestrial origin. Says Lars Pendelson, current project president: "Yeah, we just can't see going on when they are more practical applications of the technology".
Those more practical applications were discovered recently when the SETI@Home team discovered a promising possible alien signal was actually a cell phone call placed by an astronaut on the Saturn space station. Lars comments, "Yeah, we were really pissed about that one - we had the code geeks working overtime decoding that one, only to discover it was some bloak talking dirty to his girl on the Saturn space station. But at least we found a practical application for the technology".
Beginning next month, the SETI@Home space array and orbital server farm will be redeployed routing cell phone traffic for Mars, Saturn, Jupiter and the asteroid belt.
Users of the SETI community were understandbly dissappointed that their pet project was going away. The slashdot community in particular was in an uproar, having just recently narrowly edged out Team Microsoft in a heated, centuries long stats battle.
Lars knows that the user community will be let down, but hopes that they realize that finding ET is an "utterly hopeless and wasteful quest." He continues, "It's just plain stupid to waste all this equipment, when cell phone service in the outlying solar system is so poor."
Re:Eighth post! (Score:1)
Re:Serious Inter-LATA (Score:1)
Re:seti was fun. (Score:1)
Re:frequencies (Score:1)
Oh, and just following the link at the end of your post:
COUGHCOUGHBULLSHITCOUGH...*ahem*
Re:A-hah! (Score:1)
Re:seti was fun. (Score:1)
Or use Google [google.com]
Re:frequencies (Score:1)
I have a better solution (Score:2)
The article says:
Our search for extraterrestrial intelligence assumes that an alien civilization wishing to make contact with other races would broadcast a signal that is easily detectable and easily distinguishable from natural sources of radio emission. One way to achieve these goals is to send a narrowband signal. By concentrating the signal power in a very narrow frequency band, the signal will stand out among the natural broadband sources of noise.
Ok, now, if the little green men have a headstart on us, and they are smart enough, why don't WE SMART EARTHLINGS not broadcast to THEM a powerful narrow frequency signal? If our guesses here are right about their higher intelligence, they probably have better resources for computing and will be able to process whatever it is we're sending... And all that, given that some gov body on earth is willing to invest in a project where a signal is being transmitted for over 50 years from earth towards space, and is willing to understand that IF the signal is being received and translated, a response will come in YET ANOTHER 50 years (And notice my optimism about the distance in light years, and in cycles of response!)... well, if such a goverment existed, it would be in Amsterdam, where pot is legal :-)
My two buckazoids :-)
Skaag.
Re:is this really worth it? (Score:3)
If "communicate" means a dialog, then obviously we aren't -- it's forbidden by the laws of physics. But even if we lucked out and found aliens 5 or 10 light-years away, the speed of light wouldn't be the important thing. The important thing is that we'd have nothing in common. The galaxy has existed for billions of years, so there's no reason to think we'd both happen to discover radio technology at almost the same time. A randomly chosen intelligen species is likely to be either millions of years ahead of us or millions of years behind us in development. If we were a million years ahead of them, they wouldn't be doing radio. So most likely they'd be so far ahead of us in terms of development that it wouldn't be a two-way dialog where we both have profound thoughts to offer each other.
Is there any point? Don't be silly. Discovering intelligent life elsewhere in the universe would be the most important intellectual event of the last thousand years.
maybe we should work on traveling these kinds of distances in space first.
What's your logic? Radio is fairly easy. Physical travel across interstellar distances is ridiculously hard. The energy required to accelerate a 100-ton space ship to 10% of the speed of light would be about 10^20 joules, which is hundreds of times greater than the entire world's annual energy budget. Sending people to Mars isn't even likely to happen within the next 100 years.
The Assayer [theassayer.org] - free-information book reviews
Re:Social experimentation. (Score:1)
Holy $hit! thats one powerful cell phone! Nokia's new feature: instant user incineration upon pressing the "send" button.
musta meant 7.2 × 10^-25 W/m2.
Re:...but would They hear Us? (Score:1)
Military radars tend to be wideband. If they actually pointed in one direction in space, the range would go off as the fourth root of the bandwidth. They don't point in a constant direction, so the observation time will be limited. Once you exceed a time of about 1/(bandwidth) the range is proportional to the fourth root of the observation time if you tune the observation time to the in beam time, and the square root if you use a fixed observation time.
SETI@Home has a bandwidth that is 100s to 1000s of times too narrow to be optimum for such radar (square root penalty, I think) and uses a fixed observation time for the purposes of the above range formulae.
The power that one has to consider for such calculations is not the peak power, but the average power.
The one sort of radar that definitely does have the necessary characteristics for detection at well over 50 light years is CW Doppler radar used by Arecibo, Goldstone and others for measuring asteroid orbital paremeters. This has a relatively constant direction (they know where to point from optical observations). It's disadvantage, which it tends to share with other radars, is that it unlikely to produce more than one detection, which means that it can't be confirmed; I think some people suspect that we may already have detected such signals, but have to discount them as one off events.
All our attempts to send our own messges have used this sort of planetary radar transmitter.
Listening on 1.42GHz tends to favour intentional contact signals over leakage. Although the SETI@Home configuration can't achieve this, Arecibo ought to be able to detect its own radar transmissions across the galaxy.
Re:good description, but... (Score:2)
> because the laws of physics prohibit anything
> faster, but if that's true, why would they even
> bother?
Well, we have been sending RF garbage into space since Der Fuhrer hosted the Olympics in 193X, regardless whether or not it was feasible to be sending people to Alpha Centauri or it was too far away to really talk to Little Green Men. Bets are that ETI has been doing the same thing as well.
Re:...but would They hear Us? (Score:1)
I should add, that whilst fourth root for range may not seem that bad, the number of candidates stars depends on the cube of the range, out to a few hundred light years, so the 100 million, or so, bandwidth discrepancy will result in about a million times less chance of detection for the same total signal duration and mean transmit power, compared with a CW beacon at the minimum useful bandwidth.
The limited in beam time may well further reduce the candidates by a factor of over a thousand.
Re:SETI@home - Why not? (Score:1)
Poof!
Re:I have a better solution (Score:2)
I don't think that it's valid to assume anything at this point about intelligence of aliens, particularly since if they evolved in an environment very different than our own, their thought processes are also likely to be very different, and may not correspond to our ideas about what intelligence is. Even amongst different cultures on Earth, it's difficult to administer an objective IQ test.
It would be safe to assume that any aliens that are able to initiate contact with us are more technologically advanced, but that's all. For example, it's entirely possible that even if they possess that technology, they took much longer to develop it that we would have.
Re:frequencies (Score:2)
As long as they don't bounce the signals off our own satellites, everything is okay.
Re:A cellphone on saturn's moons (Score:1)
Serious Inter-LATA (Score:4)
So what are the roaming charges for Saturn's moons?
Schwab
One of these days... (Score:5)
ET (ET@QUADRA-5.EAM3002.GALAXY.NET)
FIRST POST!
Sorry. Humor for the evening
Re:Future headline (Score:1)
-josh
Social experimentation. (Score:5)
Thousands of people are using it, religiously. I've been running it since it came out, i've overclocked my computer father, upgraded my processor, and even went so far as to install it quietly on the server farm at work
I'm not sure if people are in to it because they Dig feeling like part of the worlds largest computation (information age mob mentality?) or simply because we're incredibly lonely and, more often than not, thourougly dissapointed in the human race. The fact that you have seti at home clubs and organizations, people hold personal meetings to discuss how many work units they've burned in the last month (I guess thats the other factor... what better way to flex your hardcore box), Almost outweighs the fact that you can hear cell phones on saturn... besides, from what i hear, the long distance rates from there are deadly.
That's no moon... (Score:1)
Chris Mattern
frequencies (Score:2)
Yes, this will catch most signals directed at us. But, what if aliens are sending a composite signal from several stars? Also, what if the aliens are sending a signal whose principle is as yet unknown here, and it occupies nonconsecutive frequencies?
The point being the data should be examined for more than one kind of pattern, and patterns introduced and/or obliterated by the distribution network should be accounted for.
Nothing new (Score:4)
The problem to date, to my mind has been that the processing is too front end intensive. This project should do rough curve fitting first (ie do quick calculations on client computers, to find a general idea of the curve) and then select areas of interest to farm out more signifigant data to client computers. But that's just my opinion.
who knows, with 10 gHz possibly on the way, this discussion may be a moot point as I send it.
Pre-qualifying work units (Score:1)
I think you miss the point of the clients in SETI@Home. The purpose of the clients is to do the pre-filtering, so that Berkeley has a manageable number of candidates for subsequent processing.
The only real curves they have to work with are the curves of event rate against detection threshold, and they had good ideas of those already; these are used to set the reporting thresholds for the clients. They will consider themselves very lucky if they find even one confirmed ET, so they are not trying to construct maps of ET density.
The original concept [berkeley.edu] did assume restricting the work units to ones from the plane of our galaxy, as those would give the highest proportion of Sun-like stars, but that was when they didn't think they would have enough clients to process all the data.
Unless and until we have detected several ETs (who may then tell us where to look for the others!) we have no means of calibrating any rules we use to select good candidates.
Re:Social experimentation. (Score:2)
Re:Could they open-source the screensaver part? (Score:1)
There is a shared memory interface to a separate graphical display on the Unix version. I have a feeling that the specification for that interface has been published, but I can't find it at the moment.
Many of the graphical features are available using third party tools, using data in the state.sah file; it's basically only the real time spectrum and the real time amplitude profiles that require a special interface.
Would we ever broadcast? (Score:1)
is this really worth it? (Score:2)
Re:Social experimentation. (Score:1)
Final Analysis: (Free)+(Doesn't impact my system)+(Important)=(something that I will do).
But that's just my $.02...
A-hah! (Score:1)
Re:good description, but... (Score:2)
I really don't think that SETI will find any signals (note, this is a nearly completely groundless position, based solely on gut feeling). I also think that it would be criminal to miss a chance to communicate with another intelligent civilization, simply by not listening.
Doug
Want feedback? - Go get SETI Monitor (Score:1)
It is called SETI Monitor and is listed on the main SETI@Home site under Related web sites - Add-ons for Windows clients.
You can get it at http://users.surfree.net.il/l.fainshil/
I am sure there are tons of other utilities that do the same thing but I like this one.
SETI Monitor displays a graph of the the spikes and gaussians found on the work unit currently being processed along with the estimated time left, estimated total time for the WU and other technical information taken from the state.sah file.
It also remembers all your past work units with all the above stats for each and can display a summary page of all the spikes and gaussians you found since it has been running.
I've been using SETI Monitor for a few months now and although the information it displays is interesting in the beginning, it slowly becomes almost as boring as the screensaver graphics. But I still like the feature where it keeps track of all the WUs that I have processed (and you can GREP through its list of old result files to do your own stats).
Happy crunching.
Re:are WE transmitting at 1450 Mhz? (Score:1)
seti, largest cpu crunches useless data (Score:1)
it's immensely popular because:
1. it was the first popular distributed project that was more easily understood by the public than breaking some 64-bit code.
2. communicating with aliens has been a primary theme in science fiction in the last 100 years
3. many so called spiritual people have turned from believing in the Supreme Being to superior beings.
4. X-Files
there's no doubt there is/was/will be intelligent life out there. but i think it's much rarer than most people think. the incredible series of events that created intelligence on earth is staggering in complexity and randomness. granted, there are probably many other random even paths that lead to intelligence, keep in mind that intelligence itself is not evolutionarily stable. it's a strategy a small part of the animal kingdom happened to stumble across here on earth but it was all luck that allowed intelligence to survive. if it wasn't for a couple of well timed asteroids, the proper amount of radiation, etc. the world would now be owned by insects (and maybe one day it will) as they are the most efficient form of life on the planet.
so lets assume that intelligence is needed in sending a coherent message that we can detect. how long have we, as the human race have had the capability of generating radio waves. a century perhaps?
if the universe has a finite age, we can assume that the development of intelligent life took some window of time and it's not an unreasonable assumption that any intelligent life in the universe had only evolved to the point of sending radio waves in say the last million years.
and here's the kicker. how long will an intelligent lifeform survive? we have come close to wiping ourselves out several times already. every year more ways of wiping out the intelligent population on our planet are developed. if anything, we're more at risk because most of us have relaxed since the end of the Cold War. how long do we have? lets say 400 more years before something catastrophic happens (i think further out and that and we may have settled enough extra terrestial worlds that we'll make it, but that's a big if).
we have to assume that other intelligent races will face similar problems as we do, intelligence came out of competition, after all, so do wars and tribal/religious persecution...
So lets say the average window during which an intelligent species can broadcast a meaningful radio message is 500 years.
combine this with the time to intelligence mentioned earlier and we have a very tiny portion of space that SETI can cover considering the limitations of light speed.
and this is assuming that the intelligent species that happens to be in the perfect region actually bothered to develop radio waves in the first place (or equipment that sends radio off as a side effect). not every atmosphere will bounce radio waves the way it does on earth, maybe our otherwise perfectly located race never needed radio, they developed a different communication system (light based) or have ESP or something.
my point is that yes there is life out there, but this seti@home project is a pipe dream. we are using billions of cpu cycles for something it may be impossible to find. ever. and think of another thing, 99.9999999999999999999999999% of your these precious cpu cycles are used to analyze completely random noise. at least if the seti@home shared their cpus with other radio astronomy projects, that would be cool.
use your cycles at folding@home or similar projects instead. every work unit is meaningful and the possible results of f@h have the potential to be immediately useful to humans now.
i don't expect seti@home to go away, but i do wish people would stop caring less about the stats and get off the et kicks and realize that crunching useless data is still the same as not using your cpu idle time at all.
there are other distributed projects that are much more meaningful but can hardly get started because of seti@home's success which is mainly driven by media and the recent infatutation with the super natural into which et's fall for some bizarre reason...
--
j u l e s @ p o p m o n k e y . c o m
Is seti@home real? (Score:1)
it just dawned on me. (Score:4)
that's not to say SETI@home isn't doing great, I hear they've even been in the situation of not having enough work units to send out, but this whole project could be made into something much bigger, much grander.
I sure S@H could be looking at this data with more precision than they are currently, through numerous refinements to the search criteria and formulae. The limit is only in how many cpu cycles they can reliably expect. I believe the volunteer membership base could be doubled with one very minor refinement to the graphical client: by briefly blink-highlighting canditate signals in the 3axis bar graph gizmo. The article mentions that they've accumulated 1.1 billion candidate signals to date. You can be relatively certain that if you've completed even 1 data unit, you found one of these signals.
It seems to me that the eventual boredom with the SETI@home client is due to the almost complete dearth of feedback or accomplishment. the information displayed on the client is interesting, but it changes very slowly and in a completely predictable way. The simple psychological reward of blinking a triplet or a phased pulse when a canditate signal is hit would go a long way towards providing the rewarding sense of accomplishment people seems to be hoping for out of this project. This simple new feature would not interfere with the science and hardly slow down the typical cliet computer, so I say please!~ add this feature!
:)Fudboy
Re:Future headline (Score:1)
Now everyone get out of this SETI sh** and run the www.distributed.net client !
Yours,
Matador
Re:Social experimentation. (Score:2)
As far as my employment. I'm system administrator... and the guy with the money (I hate the word boss) has seen my little seti farm, and told me "let me know when you catch any ETs"
So feh to the first part and feh to the second part.
Re:What? (Score:1)
As for successfully finding a signal, they do mention that postprocessing has yet to move into full gear. Even when it does start, it usually takes several years to complete (at least based on the timeframes for other SETI projects).
One interesting idea I've contemplated is that S@H and other similar distributed computing projects have actually had a positive effect on the technology sector of the economy. Without a doubt, there are people that care only about their stats, and are willing to purchase faster machines in order to boost their stats (and hence create a bit more demand for hardware). Given that there are over 2 million participants, this effect adds up. I'd be curious to see estimates or a study on this matter if anyone knows of some.
Re:seti was fun. (Score:2)
Do you think a SETI project would turn down anyone who wanted to give to them? Considering the difficulty SETI projects have getting funding, I'm sure they're happy to take the money.
If you really think that giving money to SETI@home is part of Paul Allen's/Microsoft's plans of world domination, then you are a sad, sad, person.
A cellphone on saturn's moons (Score:2)
I don't know how many objects exist that close to earth, but I don't think its that many. While there very well may be something out there, sending signals, I seriously doubt that it will ever be picked up by seti at home.
Re:seti was fun. (Score:1)
Why I use SETI@HOME (Score:2)
As the song goes:
"So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure
How amazingly unlikely is your birth
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space
Because there's bugger all down here on Earth"
--"The Galaxy Song", Monty Python's Flying Circus
Could they open-source the screensaver part? (Score:1)
TomatoMan
there are cell phones on saturns moon ? (Score:1)
Re:frequencies (Score:1)
Daniel
Assumptions (Score:3)
Conversely, I realized that I could have been easily hoodwinked by a great sounding operation that I understood (basically) only on faith! I guess the lesson here is caveat downloader!
Re:What? (Score:1)
Nah we wouldn't do that would we.
Im a jedi as the guy on tv was before me (Score:1)
Re:Why I use SETI@HOME (Score:1)
I do the same thing. I've even set my ol' celeron 400, and my machine at work too- but I am a sad-sack sci/sci-fi buff.
These things are expected of me.
I was thinking more of my co-worker dullards, always fickle and finicky for the latest eye candy. those bastards.
:)Fudboy
Re:Why I use SETI@HOME (Score:1)
Re:Future headline (Score:1)
Rather than improve the efficiency of the client program, the "SETI@home", the authors decided to waste more and more CPU cycles performing useless math operations. The net result, is that the ice caps melted back in 2089. The cause of the melting was traced too an effort to supply domestic energy for billions of consumers computers running the version 38.5 "SETI@home" screen saver.
communication (Score:1)
A few quick assumptions:
1. We do not understand everything there is to understand about physics.
2. Any alien civilization out there capable of communicating beyond their planet is most likely far more advanced than us.
3. Any alien civilization far more advanced than us will have a better understanding of the laws of nature than us.
Leads me to believe that they would have developed a means of communication by now that we haven't even thought of. If they're capable of traveling faster than the speed of light (for all you UFO buffs out there), they must ALSO be capable of communicating faster than the speed of light.
That means they definitely are NOT communicating via radio waves.
So what could they be communicating with? Perhaps they open up mini wormholes and send signals through those. Perhaps there's yet some force of nature (specifically type of signal) we have not yet detected [insert Star Trek signal name here]. Or maybe they're using something like quantom entanglement (http://www.qubit.org/intros/entang/).
I imagine that IF these aliens exist, one day we might just suddenly open a floodgate by tapping into their version of the internet. We just haven't figured out how to do that yet. Or they don't exist, or they do exist and they're so far away and physics is so limiting we'll never find out they do.
Whatever it may be, I doubt radio is the source, but as someone said above, it'd be almost criminal to not look.
Re:A cellphone on saturn's moons (Score:2)
Actually, it's a bit closer than that - about eight light minutes. But perhaps you're thinking of Proxima Centauri, which is about 4.6 light years distant.
---
Re:Social experimentation. (Score:1)
This coming from a seti user with 35 units....
... the psychological analysis is staggering!
Re:Nothing new (Score:1)
The other side of the coin... (Score:1)
Does anyone have any idea if there are any projects in which we are transmitting this kind of signal?
The real story (Score:1)
QIn'latDaq jevwI'
QIn'lat veng jaHtaH jevwI'
veHnaghmeyDaq QanmeH nejta' ghotpu'
'ach Hur ratlhta' wa' loD
ghaHDaq jaHta' qeylIS' 'ej jatlh nuq bIvangtaH
mughIjbe' SuS jatlh nagh ruSwI' je vISo'be' qabwIj
SuSDaq vIQam 'ej muvuvmoH 'oH
batlh Qochbe'ta' qeylIS 'ej vengDaq jaHta'
jajchu' ghoSpu' jevwI' 'ej loD HoHpu' 'oH
ghotpu' jatlh qeylIS qoH vuvbe' SuS
--Shoeboy
Re:seti was fun. (Score:1)
Doesn't Matter... (Score:2)
good description, but... (Score:3)
Give some of this tech to Sprint PCS (Score:2)
-josh
Re:seti was fun. (Score:2)
>
>that's a little like taking maney from organized crime...so i pulled the plug/couldn't care less now.
Just a nitpick, that's the SETI Institute (Project Phoenix) which received the money from Allen. For a complete list of all of the *SETI@home* corporate/individual sponsors, check their front page and donor list. Project Phoenix and SETI@home are not the same.
You're exactly right! (Score:2)
That's so true! (Score:2)
Yeah, I always thought they should add an "ET Counter" that displays the total number of aliens your computer has found so far!
are WE transmitting at 1450 Mhz? (Score:3)
Re:And the first Alien Message received by SETI is (Score:2)
"What is it?"
"It's hard to say, I can only decode one letter at a time. I'll send them to the screen."
YHBT, YHL, HAND.
"But what does it mean?"
dave
Re:are WE transmitting at 1450 Mhz? (Score:2)
Re:Social experimentation. (Score:2)
Despite us living in a very individualistic era, the human instinct generally is to band together into packs. How this manifests itself in an intelligent species is an unquenchable desire to "be a part of something larger than yourself" - such as taking a small piece of an incredibly large computational puzzle. The rewards, when they come, will be enormous, and shared by us all. Until then, we can band together and dream...
Darnit, it looks like the Internet might be good for something after all.