Will we always be "observing"?


by Vyom
Tags: observing
Vyom
Vyom is offline
#1
Jan28-12, 07:59 AM
P: 2
Hello everyone, I am from India. Have been an astronomy fan since childhood. Have also been reading this forum since quite a while. Looking forward to interact and learn from knowledgeable people here.

Now coming to the topic, let's say we detect intelligent life in our neighbourhood (10 LYs for example). We can "understand" each others languages. LSB would mean that the 2-way communication is basically useless. It would take 10 years for transmission to reach to the other side. So we can basically say goodbye to communicating with any intelligent life form, and the mere thought of traveling sounds like a joke.

Therefore will we always be in "observation" mode?
Phys.Org News Partner Space news on Phys.org
Testing immune cells on the International Space Station
Easter morning delivery for space station
NASA: Engineer vital to 1969 moon landing dies
DaveC426913
DaveC426913 is offline
#2
Jan28-12, 08:29 AM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,325
Quote Quote by Vyom View Post
Hello everyone, I am from India. Have been an astronomy fan since childhood. Have also been reading this forum since quite a while. Looking forward to interact and learn from knowledgeable people here.

Now coming to the topic, let's say we detect intelligent life in our neighbourhood (10 LYs for example). We can "understand" each others languages. LSB would mean that the 2-way communication is basically useless. It would take 10 years for transmission to reach to the other side. So we can basically say goodbye to communicating with any intelligent life form, and the mere thought of traveling sounds like a joke.

Therefore will we always be in "observation" mode?
A mere 10 years delay would be a godsend. In terms of our planet and race, having a conversation that "fast" would be better than we could possibly hope for.

It's not like we have to wait to be asked a question before deciding to respond. We know what their questions are going to be. Essentially, we just start educating them from the ground up. Beam them Encyclopedia Britannica. They will do the same. No one has to ask.

In terms of specific questions we may have, well, 20 years is a blip. How long did it take them to compose the message for the Voyager plaque?

Also note that we routinely set up delayed benefit missions every time we send a probe to the outer planets. Those missions take years to start returning data. No scientist will balk at starting a mission like this that won't pay off for 20 years.
Radrook
Radrook is offline
#3
Jan29-12, 01:00 PM
P: 334
Quote Quote by Vyom View Post
. .

So we can basically say goodbye to communicating with any intelligent life form, and the mere thought of traveling sounds like a joke.

Therefore will we always be in "observation" mode?
Please remember that many things that seemed like a joke to people not too long ago are now commonplace. Computers that play chess and beat masters, humans flying in heavier than air machines, and two-way rapid audible conversation from opposite sides of the world all seemed like jokes at one time. But here we are taking those things for granted. So too it might turn out with interstellar space travel and even perhaps in time with the velocity of interstellar communication. Only time will tell.

DaveC426913
DaveC426913 is offline
#4
Jan29-12, 05:11 PM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,325

Will we always be "observing"?


Quote Quote by Radrook View Post
Please remember that many things that seemed like a joke to people not too long ago are now commonplace. Computers that play chess and beat masters, humans flying in heavier than air machines, and two-way rapid audible conversation from opposite sides of the world all seemed like jokes at one time. But here we are taking those things for granted. So too it might turn out with interstellar space travel and even perhaps in time with the velocity of interstellar communication. Only time will tell.
Well, there's a difference between soft hurdles and hard roadblocks.

Powerful enough engines for aircraft is not in the same class of problem as the speed limit of the universe.
Radrook
Radrook is offline
#5
Jan29-12, 11:32 PM
P: 334
Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
Well, there's a difference between soft hurdles and hard roadblocks.

Powerful enough engines for aircraft is not in the same class of problem as the speed limit of the universe.
I didn't say that all scientific hurdles are the same.
Neither did I compare the sound barrier with the speed-of-light-barrier.
Obviously one poses greater challenges than the other.

I merey said that apparent impossibility now isn't necessarily irrefutable evidence of permanent impossibility.


Also, I didn't say that interstellar flight would involve breaking the light speed barrier.
I merely said that interstellar travel might seem impossible now from the poster's viewpoint but might become commonplace in the far future.



Here is an excerpt from a relevant article:


Interstellar travel



Distance (ly)

Alpha Centauri 4.3 ly Closest system. Three stars (G2, K1, M5). Component A similar to our sun (a G2 star).


Barnard's Star 6.0 ly Small, low luminosity M5 red dwarf. Next closest to Solar System.

Sirius 8.7 ly Large, very bright A1 star with a white dwarf companion.

Epsilon Eridani 10.8 ly Single K2 star slightly smaller and colder than the Sun. Has an asteroid belt, might have a giant and one much smaller planet,[5] and may possess a solar system type planetary system.


Tau Ceti 11.8 ly Single G8 star similar to the Sun. High probability of possessing a solar
system type planetary system.

Gliese 581 20.3 ly Multiple planet system. The unconfirmed exoplanet Gliese 581 g and the confirmed exoplanet Gliese 581 d are in the star's habitable zone.


Antimatter rockets
An antimatter rocket would have a far higher energy density and specific impulse than any other proposed class of rocket. If energy resources and efficient production methods are found to make antimatter in the quantities required, it would be theoretically possible to reach speeds near that of light, where time dilation would become much more noticeable, thus making time pass at a slower rate for the travelers as perceived by an outside observer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_travel
Vyom
Vyom is offline
#6
Jan30-12, 11:12 AM
P: 2
Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
A mere 10 years delay would be a godsend. In terms of our planet and race, having a conversation that "fast" would be better than we could possibly hope for.

It's not like we have to wait to be asked a question before deciding to respond. We know what their questions are going to be. Essentially, we just start educating them from the ground up. Beam them Encyclopedia Britannica. They will do the same. No one has to ask.

In terms of specific questions we may have, well, 20 years is a blip. How long did it take them to compose the message for the Voyager plaque?

Also note that we routinely set up delayed benefit missions every time we send a probe to the outer planets. Those missions take years to start returning data. No scientist will balk at starting a mission like this that won't pay off for 20 years.
Yes I get that any scientist would go mad if such a scenario were to happen.

But I was thinking about having real-time communication which is impossible at such distances. So unless we find a way to send information faster than light, 2-way communication would really suck. And if the Intelligent Civilisation is thousands of LYs away well then...
Ryan_m_b
Ryan_m_b is online now
#7
Jan30-12, 11:32 AM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,348
Quote Quote by Vyom View Post
...unless we find a way to send information faster than light...
All current evidence points away from this being possible. Even if it were possible there would be some bizzare consequences.

Regarding interstellar travel aside from the technological hurdles (building and maintaining a stable productive closed-ecosystem, a complete self-sufficient industry, a sufficiently sized noosphere, a social organisation stable for long periods and sufficient propulsion) the biggest worry I have is the inherent danger. Coring an billion tonne asteroid before spinning it and sending it off at a high fraction of C is all fun and games before someone aims it at a planet.
DaveC426913
DaveC426913 is offline
#8
Jan30-12, 02:32 PM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,325
Quote Quote by Vyom View Post
Quote Quote by DaveC426913 View Post
No scientist will balk at starting a mission like this that won't pay off for 20 years.
Yes I get that any scientist would go mad if such a scenario were to happen.
Actually, balk=hesitate. So what I said was: no scientist would hesitate at the chance. i.e. they do it routinely now.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
The "more political thread" besides "Japan Earthquake: nuclear plants" scientific one Nuclear Engineering 764
In binary can we have a value with "deci" "centi" "mili" or more lower valued prefix? Computers 14
Can anyone help me to find out the definition of "carrier swing"&"deviation ratio"? General Physics 1
Difference between "Identical", "Equal", "Equivalent" Calculus & Beyond Homework 9