Why Not Fund SETI With a Lottery Bond? 191
KentuckyFC writes "The Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence or SETI is one of the highest profile projects in science. And yet its biggest challenge is in generating the funds required to scour the skies for signs of intelligent life. Government funding agencies generally ignore SETI so most funding comes from wealthy patrons such as Paul Allen who has donated $30 million for the construction of a radio interferometer designed to scour the skies for signs of ET. But the lack of other donors means this facility is still incomplete and only partially operational. But one astrobiologist has a solution. Why not create a lottery bond that allows investors to buy shares that yield a fixed rate of interest but also generates enough cash to fund ongoing SETI projects? To add an element of spice, this bond is also a lottery: when the search finally succeeds, a subset of the shareholders will receive a payout from the kitty. This is a fund that is likely to have global appeal but will need a financial institution willing and capable of taking it on. Any suggestions?"
Well (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Well (Score:5, Interesting)
I am reminded of an episode of ST Voyager when they found evidence of an older civilization and someone finally figured to check the RF bands, which hadn't been used for centuries.
I would suggest that such aliens have something better than radio to use. Yes, they might have used it for a few hundred years, but that is a thin slice of time to catch it, without being ahead of or behind the transmissions in space.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
SETI has always kind of baffled me. If they were to advance the technology they use in order to further their goals by widening the search they may have something to monetize.
Re: (Score:3)
Why does everything need to have something to monetize?
Re: (Score:3)
Why does everything need to have something to monetize?
Because _biology_ requires the use of resources and resources require energy.
Humans are biological; global civilization is a biological process that depends on resource use.
We have figured out ways to use 'money' to pay for moving resources around, but we haven't yet figured out ways to use resources for free.
Re: (Score:2)
Ants are biological.
No, I'm not really advocating an ant-like society for humans, just trying to make the point that using biology as an answer to this question is silly. Out common, basic needs as biological entities do not require our society to use money. Our species specific human natures... maybe.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Everything doesn't but a project looking for money could become self sustaining if it had something to monetize and cut out the need to find private or government funding.
Re: (Score:2)
I would suggest that such aliens have something better than radio to use.
I'm curious what can we imagine the aliens could use to communicate. I found this bit [physicsworld.com] on neutrino communication. It also mentions axions (which might not even exist). Gravitational waves are suggested in the comments. Are there any other potential communication technologies we can read about?
Re: (Score:2)
We've more or less stopped using detectable radio signals ourselves. Most communication is now carried in fiber optics, and the radio we use is either satellite or many small low power transmitters transmitting encrypted traffic.
Give it another 20-30 years, and we would not be transmitting anything by radio that could be picked outside our solar system.
Re: (Score:2)
"We've more or less stopped using detectable radio signals ourselves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNHYTem01T0 [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Detectable in a SETI sense, that is detactable from 10s or 100s of lightyears away.
Good luck picking up a satellite-TV or DAB radio transmission 100 light years away.
Communication is moving away from high effect broadcast to point-to-point.
Re: (Score:2)
Are there any other potential communication technologies we can read about?
Quantum entanglement used to be a popular possibility for FTL communication, but most physicists today dismiss it as a form of communication.
Re: (Score:3)
What do you mean today? any experts has known it wouldn't be useful.
Don't confuse pop culture headline and sci - fi fir actual experts.
.
Re: (Score:2)
Quantum entanglement does not work that way.
Re: (Score:2)
"Gravitational waves are suggested in the comments."
becasue they would use something they would be incredible energy intensive for no gain over RF?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious what can we imagine the aliens could use to communicate.
Subspace FTL communication?
Ok, so that is fiction, but ask someone 200 years ago what they would have used and they wouldn't have been able to tell you either.
If you had tried to explain radio to someone 200 years ago, they would have looked at you like you were insane.
The real answer is, "We have no idea". But I'd suggest that whatever it is they use, we haven't found it yet and have no idea what it is. I just don't think we're likely to find ET using smoke signals, radio, or two cans and a string
Re: (Score:2)
So let's fund SETI to research and develop a subspace radio array. The payoff from that would be substantial! :-)
Agreed! (Score:2, Insightful)
I would suggest that such aliens have something better than radio to use. Yes, they might have used it for a few hundred years, but that is a thin slice of time to catch it
You nailed it. Not many people stop to consider this. It might be in the back of their minds, but they ignore it because the goal of SETI is just so exciting.
1. If the alien civilization is advanced enough to truly travel the galaxy (exceeding the speed of light), you can bet your house they already know about us -- and that they've decid
Re: (Score:3)
I personally think this is something that has to be stumbled upon, rather than sought out.
Most of your post was quite wise, but I'd just like to make a point here.
Imagine trying to fly without the internal combustion engine... The Wright Brothers figured out that power was their problem. Nothing a human can do will enable us to fly using just our own power, we're too heavy and the flying machines are too heavy, we need engines.
Once engines of light enough weight and great enough power came out, we had airplanes all over the place.
Could you build an airplane out of a steam engine? Perha
Re: (Score:2)
I would suggest that such aliens have something better than radio to use.
Like the Internet. Or call centers. Possibly call centers which are connected to the Internet for cost-efficiency. Next time you're talking to "Bob" while trying to troubleshoot your cable modem, ask him if he's an alien, and tell him you'll keep his secret in exchange for some small compensation, such as a couple of Higgs bosons (one to lose and the other to not show to Stephen Hawking [theguardian.com])... or the secret to consistent and reliable cold fusion.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately we don't have anything better than radio and optical to listen with. Maybe LIGO.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That was in the "The '37's" episode of the 2nd season of Voyager if I am not mistaken. What they found was evidence of rust in space (which by ST logic should not exist) and when they tracked it down they came across an old 1930's Ford pickup truck floating in space. After they pull the truck onto the ship they start messing around with it, get it started (though I doubt it wold have started the gas would have long evaporated through the fuel system especially in the vacuum of space, or if it was somehow he
Re: (Score:3)
I would disagree. The idea that aliens are nearby, using the same freq we are, are transmitting something we will picky, and that we are looking in the right place in the sky... The odds are so very long...
So it's good that that's not what SETI is looking for. They are not expecting to find alien I Love Lucy reruns. It's any EM pattern that is not otherwise explainable. Many such patterns have been discovered, but were later explained away by the astrophysicists as spinning neutron stars, etc. Natural phenomenon. Likely signs of life would be something like EM leakage from artificial generators, not necessarily some form of communication broadcast.
Re: (Score:2)
Likely signs of life would be something like EM leakage from artificial generators, not necessarily some form of communication broadcast.
I fully understand that...
But my point remains that the odds of finding that make looking for a needle in a haystack child's play.
It isn't impossible (few things really are), but it is so remote that I'd suggest the resources would be better spent on another area of space development.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
MAYBE more advanced aliens do have something better than radio. But... we have no reason to believe that. Sci Fi commonly uses better than radio communication as a plot device because it enables better stories. It's not because we have much evidence that with more technological development such a thing is possible. I think a lot of people discount the possiblities of RF Seti because thay have watched too many Sci Fi shows.
Don't get me wrong. As far as I know it is possible that there is something beyond r
Re: (Score:2)
There is still a lot of other factors too...
We are looking for Radio waves. We as a society had radio waves for a little more then a century. Earth has been around for 5 billion year, Humans only 2 Million Years, complex human society for like 20,000 years. And we will probably use radio for an other hundred years (As we try to move towards more secure, and have a better optical infrastructure, yaddy yaddy yaddy). That alone is 0.000004%
Now we can factor in things like general static of space, degrading th
Re: not picking up the RF signal was ridiculous (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Answer: More or less no one.
Who will be listening to radio in 150 years?
Answer: More or less no one.
The time window to hear or detect someone, while looking in the right direction, makes winning the lotto look easy.
SETI is a nice idea, I'm all for the idea in principle, but the current plan? Waste of time.
Re: (Score:2)
The time window to hear or detect someone, while looking in the right direction, makes winning the lotto look easy.
At least on this planet, transmissions are rarely just a single push to talk, or even just a few. The frequency is reused multiple times, or even constantly on a carrier. Spectral displays can show activity across very large bands, and automatic reporting and recording of the activity isn't that difficult.
All that said, I agree that I'd place my money on winning the lottery many, many times before anyone finds ET.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine a space exploration vessel just ignoring radio, it's such an interesting and useful EM range in astronomy. A starship that didn't routlnely check the visible band would be more plausible.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah cause the aliens have a different EM spectrum to work with.... ST Voyager not picking up the RF signal was ridiculous and only there as a plot device.
"Different EM spectrum." That really makes my day. That's right up there with "Heisenberg Compensator". Lets hear it for Trek Science!
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
I do kind of like the idea of supporting the search for intelligent life out there by exploiting unintelligent life here. There's a poetic beauty in that, methinks.
Why not fund Ultimate Frisbee with a Lottery Bond? (Score:2)
EOM
Re: (Score:2)
Why make it that complicated? (Score:4, Interesting)
Why not just a SETI lottery?
I'm absolutely serious - I've bought precisely ONE lottery ticket my whole life (knowing statistically that my likelihood of winning is the maximum at that point*). So I'm not really a "lottery player".
But I'd cheerfully buy SETI lottery tickets - one-third of the gross goes to a the pot-winner, 2/3 goes to SETI funding. Hell, it's better return-odds than many Kickstarters.
*I didn't win.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't have to be private. The state legislature could implement it.
Re:Why make it that complicated? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've bought precisely ONE lottery ticket my whole life (knowing statistically that my likelihood of winning is the maximum at that point*).
How do you figure? Each ticket has the same chance of winning, the more you buy the more likely you are to win. But the odds are such that the expected return over the long run is less than what you would pay in.
Re:Why make it that complicated? (Score:4, Funny)
How do you figure? Each ticket has the same chance of winning, the more you buy the more likely you are to win. But the odds are such that the expected return over the long run is less than what you would pay in.
That's why smart gamblers buy multiple tickets. Buy two tickets - double your chances? Buy ten tickets and you're ten times more likely to win! How could you lose?
Re: (Score:2)
IF you buy all the ticket, you will win, 100% of the time.
Will you profit? depends on the lottery and the lottery amount.
Re: (Score:3)
Each ticket has the same chance of winning
Depending on the lottery, this may or may not be true. Some lotteries let people pick the numbers, so sequences like "1 2 3 4 5 6" will be selected by many people and the pot will be split. The same applies for sequences that could represent a date, such as a birthday or anniversary. More "random" sequences will have a higher payout per ticket.
Re:Why make it that complicated? (Score:4, Informative)
Don't confuse winning with highest payout.
If maximizing payout is your goal* the yes pick all you numbers over 31.
*cause winning 100 million is worth my time, but splitting 100 million? bah
Re: (Score:2)
*cause winning 100 million is worth my time, but splitting 100 million? bah
It doesn't have to be all or nothing. If the payoff for the obscure sequences goes above 1.0, then you could participate in a syndicate to purchase the tickets and divvy up the profits, thus spreading out both the risks and the rewards. This happened with the Irish Lottery in May 1992, when a syndicate bought up 80% of the tickets [independent.co.uk], and made about a 30% profit for the participants.
Re:Why make it that complicated? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've bought precisely ONE lottery ticket my whole life (knowing statistically that my likelihood of winning is the maximum at that point*).
How do you figure? Each ticket has the same chance of winning, the more you buy the more likely you are to win. But the odds are such that the expected return over the long run is less than what you would pay in.
I find it pretty funny that people who never gamble are completely clueless when it comes to statistics and probabilities, while those who waste loads of money gambling know exactly what they're doing.
Re: (Score:3)
Why not just donate?
I'm pretty sure the people who might be interested in the overly complex bond lottery are the same people who would just donate money to seti. A Donation gives seti all your money with very little overhead compared to a bond or lottery.
Re: (Score:2)
your likelyhood for winning goes down if you buy just one ticket. however, your statistical ROI on it was better before you bought that first ticket, sucker.
unless you got fun out of it, which has a value. not something you can calculate easily, but still.
so.. seti could start an offshore casino somewhere where it is legal. too bad they might have to build the array somewhere else than usa after that..
Re: (Score:2)
The main problem in this plan... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
" There is not a single good explanation of why it has not succeeded already, "
actually, there are two:
The universe is Really, Really Big.
The universe is Very, Very Old.
There are several smaller reason, antenna size and location for example.
Also Data processing. We may have evidence on tape somewhere.
Did you know, if we would built an array if micro antenna in space the size of Rhode Island (1,212 sq miles) we would be able to detect any radio coming from within 100LY with the power of a TV broadcast.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point in the search, it makes more sense to assume that there is
Re: (Score:2)
There is no physical reason why intelligent life could not expand through space very fast on cosmological timescales, if it wanted to.
Except, you know, the speed of light. And the limits of biology and ecology. And the fact that space is three dimensional on the scales we're talking about (which means that they intelligent species would have to populate at a rate proportional to the distance from the home world cubed in order to meaningfully "populate" the new worlds.
Mars life sciences payload (Score:4, Interesting)
In the off chance that I win, my first phone call will be to Gilbert Levin, the Principal Investigator on the Viking Labeled Release (LR) experiment that gave ambiguous results.
LR was developed by Levin as a way to assay sewage treatment plant effluent without having to wait days for streaked culture plates to show anything. By using a radioactive tracer, organisms can be detected at exceedingly low levels and very quickly by the radio-traced metabolism products.
Levin has been claiming that the Viking LR indeed detected life on Mars, and he has been pleading and scheming to get a "Chiral LR" life-sciences payload onto the surface of Mars to follow up. With NASA, it is nothing doing on this score since the Viking controversy -- they simply don't want to touch another life detection experiment for some reason. I thought the largely British Polar Lander was supposed to have a Levin experiment on it, but it crashed.
On the off chance that I win at Powerball, on the chance that this is enough money to fund a Mars mission, especially after the gummint gets its tax payments, and the chance the rocket works and the payload lands softly on Mars and everything else, and maybe on the remote chance that there is life on Mars and that Gil Levin's improved Labeled LR convinces people, Gilbert Levin will be awarded a Nobel Prize and become and immortal historical figure.
As for me, maybe I will go down in history as the chump who gave up his Powerball winnings?
Re: (Score:3)
"when the search finally succeeds" (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
SETI makes several assumptions . . . (Score:3)
1. That planets with intelligent life are RF emitters.
2. That planets with intelligent life will remain planets with intelligent life,
3. That as tech advances, intelligent life will continue to emit sufficient RF to be detectable at interstellar distances.
We don't have real numbers for ANY of those values, making any calculation of odds unworkable. Me. . . I'll play the PowerBall: at least those odds are calculatable. . . (grin)
Re: (Score:2)
That planets with intelligent life are RF emitters.
if they get to the point where electronics are invented, then it's a very safe assumption.
"That planets with intelligent life will remain planets with intelligent life,"
they make no such assumption. They are well aware they could find a signal where the originating species doesn't exist anymore.
The life the broadcast the signal doesn't need to exist anymore for there to be a world impact.
"That as tech advances, intelligent life will continue to emit suffic
Bad idea, I think (Score:5, Insightful)
If you make a payout if SETI finds alien life, you suddenly give a financial motive to finding it. It could taint the results. Next Wow Signal [wikipedia.org] we find and suddenly you'll have people who paid into it saying it's proof, and scientists saying it isn't. Lawyers will become involved.
Too messy if you ask me.
Re: (Score:2)
If you make a payout if SETI finds alien life, you suddenly give a financial motive to finding it. It could taint the results. Next Wow Signal [wikipedia.org] we find and suddenly you'll have people who paid into it saying it's proof, and scientists saying it isn't. Lawyers will become involved.
Too messy if you ask me.
OR, more likely, the guy in the government who won't leak stuff for political reasons will leak that aliens have been here for half a century or more already and that our government covered it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no logical reason the Government wouldn't tell us. IT would get more money to various organization and dramatically increase are global prestige.
You don't think people like MacArthy wouldn't use it as a reason to create fear and an even larger military budget?
Lets talk agencies:
NASA: Budget would increase. No reason to hide info
DOD: Money for alien defense
And so on. Every Agency ah a interest in NOT hiding anything like that.
Plus have alien evidence would have been a great piece of leverage over th
I'm all for it, but only if (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Only if the pesky aliens will text me the winning lottery number."
The winning number is Pi
I hope you have an unlimited text plan
Why not a lottery bond for (Score:2)
Your base premise that it's high profile science might be a bit off. It takes some astounding leaps of faith to believe we will catch aliens in that period of high power but simple RF emissions. Or that they would be sending some form of beacon.
Granted if I were able to direct all basic science R&D budget it would be toward dirt cheap safe industrial scale fusion power generation.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you presume we would be the only race to send a beacon into space?
You need to generate publicity (Score:2)
Return of principal (Score:2)
Where will the money come from to make interest payments to the bondholders? Where will the money come from to return the principal to the bondholders at maturity?
If this is an example of the brilliance of the people at the Blue Marble Institute for Space Science in Seattle, they should not be funded for anything. Nothing. Nohow.
Is hearing transmissions actually feasible? (Score:4, Insightful)
We use radio telescopes to listen for stars and other celestial objects. One would assume these produce massive rf emissions. Has anyone done the math and determined if the transmitters currently used on this planet could be heard in other solar systems? Would our equipment detect them if installed there? Are our transmissions able to overcome the radio interference that would be common out there? Is there even a point to SETI?
Are we expecting alien races to use transmitters as powerful or more powerful than our own? And what subset of known space is actually a viable source at the power levels we use for communication?
Re: (Score:2)
Artificial transmissions are assumed to be structured in some way that presently-known celestial emissions aren't - some sort of time structure, having a narrow bandwidth, etc. etc. - which will make them stand out. Our own certainly are. This led to a memorable false alarm in the case of pulsars but the gist is that if you see something very structured, it's going to be worth investigating whatever it turns out to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately "Active SETI" as it is known is untenable on SETI's budget. The best they can do is a bit of timeshare on radio telescopes. Nobody else is interested.
Re: (Score:2)
We did it at least once [wikipedia.org].
state lotteries (Score:2)
Unfortunately, most states have a monopoly on lotteries. Otherwise, there would be many uses for lotteries. For example, savings can be encouraged with a lottery (prize-linked savings):
http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/lottery-savings-accounts [trendhunter.com]
http://freakonomics.com/2012/04/26/lottery-loopholes-and-deadly-doctors-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/ [freakonomics.com]
Do these idiots not know what a bond is? (Score:5, Insightful)
Did they forget the part where they have to pay out those interest payments, and the principal, and the stupid lottery at the end too?
What revenue are they planning to pay those payments with? More bonds? Do they think they are the US government or Madoff?
Re: (Score:2)
Lottery-based bonds are an uncontroversial and well-established savings instrument (e.g. the UK's "Premium Bonds") so I don't see what your problem is. The money is invested, and the gains are used to pay the interest, principal, and lottery prizes.
Maybe it's you who doesn't know what a bond is?
Re: (Score:3)
The lottery part is irrelevant, how interest is allocated to holders makes exactly zero difference to what a bond is.
Or perhaps you don't understand what "fund SETI" means?. Where is this money to invest coming from (the money from the bonds is going to fund SETI after all so it can't be it)? And why don't they just use that to fund SETI instead of adding the pointless bonds middle man?
A bond is simply a loan. The bond issuer gets a bunch of money up front and then has to pay it back in the future. That is
Who wins? (Score:2)
Or lose?
Re: (Score:2)
If the discovered Signal Translation is "EX-TERM-IN-ATE! EX-TERM-IN-ATE! EX-TERM-IN-ATE!" then you lose. Unless the next signal detected comes from The Doctor.
Sounds like an execellent idea! (Score:2)
I would opt for a different method (Score:2)
Between radio SETI and optical SETI, new technology is inevitable, technology that can be patented or sold. Isolating data from a planet orbiting a star is going to require variable interferometry of a sort we don't yet have. New algorithms will be needed, as you can't sift through billions of channels for information content efficiently with what we have.
This means you can have a well-defined ROI even if nothing is ever found. And that means you can value SETI in terms of that ROI, which means you can floa
I'm thinking of pulling the plug on Seti@Home.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Folding@Home [171.67.216.23]
Since our IT Managers demanded all systems stay up during the night for maintenance, updates, etc. and they draw their transformers draw the same power regardless of load anyway, I installed this on all the workstations as screensavers before I left their employ. I'm told he was mad at first, but everyone loves it -- somehow raised morale slightly.
There are other distributed computing projects. I'm just too lazy to look them up in the Internet Yellow Pages for you. If only there were some way
Re: Setites = low profile slabbering hucksters (Score:2)
-2 for not doing the math.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure that there are Casino owners who would disagree
Re: (Score:2)
Why are we even talking about this?
Their parents *finally* kicked them out of the basement; they need to raise cash to find a new place to live.
Re: (Score:2)
Those super-sensitive radar or radio receivers make excellent satellite spotters
With all due respect, horse hockey. Artificial satellites are quite easy to find with much cheaper equipment.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you really think the Constitution only allows for defense and law enforcement?
You should actually read it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that's not what the Constitution says:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;" -- Article I, Section 8, Clause 1
You might disagree with the general welfare clause or the interpretat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Internet was created as a means to make national data networks necessary for national defense resistant to damage caused by war. Specifically, catastrophic wars such as nuclear war. That's why funding originated with DARPA. It was a defense project, much like GPS and the interstate road system.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, it sounds like an exact opposite of the Soviet Union — where the government was deciding on everything and the private enterprise was not merely discouraged, it was (highly!) illegal. I should know, I grew up there...
Re: (Score:2)
What? no. Just do it like a normal lottery. A drawing every week, winner gets 20%
I could see PR value in doing a singe annual drawing, that would be interesting experiment.
Re: (Score:2)
Aside from the task at hand I'm sure there is a plethora of other information that SETI yields. It would be nice if all data was published in an easily consumable format. The resulting data could be a nice carrot to entice people to help crowdfund the effort.
While much of that data is probably useful in a scientific sense, a catalog of emission numbers and coordinates is not exactly the sexy sell to the public that Hubble pictures were.
Re: (Score:2)
Aside from the actual task at hand, SETI may produce a plethora of other helpful information as a byproduct. Perhaps the folks at SETI should look into crowdfunding their efforts and in exchange they could provide scientific data an easily consumable formats. They could also take a look at crowdfunding under the Jobs Act (title III).
Only if that information is catalogued, notated, and distributed in a useful manner, which they may not be devoting manpower or other resources to do.