Is this an extraterrestrial signal received by SETI?

[Orion1]

No one knows for sure what caused this signal. There is a slight possibility that it just might originate from an extraterrestrial intelligence. The bright colors on the blue background indicate that an anomalous signal was received here on Earth by a radio telescope involved in a Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI)

Reference:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020728.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0207/unknownseti_cavan.jpg

 

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Odd... I'm sure it can be explained, though. I mean, SETI (and earlier projects like it) has been going for something like 50 (?) years, and all of the odd signals can be explained by quasars, human interaction, and other natural devices.

But if it is some aliens, it really makes you wonder, doesn't it?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

SETI has only just begun. Assuming various distributions of intelligent life throughout the galaxy, some estimates show what we might not expect to find anything for another fifty years; and this assumes that we are looking for the correct signal - radio. There have been many anomalous signals that we can't explain. This particular one has charateristics of a known source but the fact is, we don't know. Unless a signal can be detected long enough by multiple stations so that we can verify the source location and rule out known astronomical phenomonon, we can only guess at the origins. Guessing does not mean ruling out ET as a possibility.

 

[Dayle Record]

Yes, the first thing we will do is administer an intelligence test, and check to see if they are really standing right in front of us, using the scientific method. We will assume that they are dumb as rocks, because they can't figure out the test, and then we will figure out they aren't really there, because we can't really prove anything.

The last report of extra terrestrials on Earth was turned in by Mexican pilots bamboozled by holographic images of UFO's; projected to protect a drug shipment, they were trying to intercept. I hope the right people discuss our planetary doings with the ET's who show up. Maybe our first contact will be someone shouting, "Hey, turn down that radio"!

 

[zoobyshoe]

The last report of extra terrestrials on Earth was turned in by Mexican pilots bamboozled by holographic images of UFO's; projected to protect a drug shipment, they were trying to intercept.

I haven't been following UFO reports. Is this true about the holographic projection? Drug smugglers have a technology like this?

 

[username]

No one knows for sure what caused this signal. There is a slight possibility that it just might originate from an extraterrestrial intelligence. The bright colors on the blue background indicate that an anomalous signal was received here on Earth by a radio telescope involved in a Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI)

It seems we have a lot of problems with intelligence on terra forget about extra terrestial!

 

[Arctic Fox]

I think these SETI astronomers are listening on the wrong frequencies. Hydrogen times Pi sounds like BS cubed. Why all the fuss in the GHz ranges? Personally I’d be listening in the kHz just above audio (+50kHz for me). 100kHz sounds like a nice round number...

 

[Orion1]

In this case, a leading possibility is that the signal originates from an unusual modulation between a GPS satellite and an unidentified Earth-based source.

Many unusual signals from space remain unidentified. No signal has yet been strong enough or run long enough to be unambiguously identified as originating from an extraterrestrial intelligence.

Have you all heard the audio base for this signal?:
http://www.setileague.org/software/unknown2.wav

It does seem to sound like an 'Alien' source...

Sounds like an intra-galactic-web network signal between two superconducting computers with enhanced microprocessors...

If we ever have, or will receive an ET signal from a civilization that is millions of years more technologically advanced than ours...do we as humans actually posess enough intelligence of our own to understand or even capable of interpreting such an advanced signal?

The question may not be that there may be intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy, but rather, is there intelligent life here on Terra?

May 12, 2004 - CNN
Mexican Air Force pilots filmed 11 unidentified objects in the skies over southern Campeche state, a Defense Department spokesman confirmed Tuesday.

A videotape made widely available to the news media on Tuesday shows the bright objects, some sharp points of light and others like large headlights, moving rapidly in what appears to be a late-evening sky.

The lights were filmed on March 5 by pilots using infrared equipment. They appeared to be flying at an altitude of about 3,500 meters (11,480 feet), and allegedly surrounded the Air Force jet as it conducted routine anti-drug trafficking vigilance in Campeche. Only three of the objects showed up on the plane's radar.

http://www.crystalinks.com/ufomexico504.jpg
http://www.crystalinks.com/mexico504.html

Reference:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0207/unknownseti_cavan.jpg
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/images/17_5_2004_ufo2.jpg
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020728.html
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_17-5-2004_pg6_9
http://www.ufoevidence.org/news/article98.htm

 

[russ_watters]

Personally I’d be listening in the kHz just above audio (+50kHz for me). 100kHz sounds like a nice round number...

You're not confusing sound waves with radio waves, are you? "...the khz just above audio..." doesn't really have any meaning since radio waves aren't sound waves.

In any case, it would be a pretty monumental task to probe the whole electromagnetic spectrum across the whole sky. We had to start somewhere.

 

[Arctic Fox]

You're not confusing sound waves with radio waves, are you? "...the khz just above audio..." doesn't really have any meaning since radio waves aren't sound waves.

No, RF just in the ULF range. As most of us know, ULF signals carry a lot further than GHz ranged carriers. I’m thinking with that in mind, maybe it would be better to send up a (2?) spacecraft with a wireline antenna listening to signals in the kHz range.

 

[Entropy]

I personally don't believe in extra terrestrial intelligence. If you actually take into account how hostile space is you'll find that complex life, or life period, is statistically unlikely to exist at all. Read up on the "Rare Earth Hypothesis" and you'll see what I mean. The Drake equation simply leaves out too many important variables like having a large moon (super rare), a Jupiter-like world, supernovae radiation, being in a calm part of a galaxy, etc.

Besides a civilization even as little as a thousand years ahead of us probably wouldn't even use radio any more. And they will probably be millions of years ahead if they even exist.

 

[Arctic Fox]

I personally don't believe in extra terrestrial intelligence. If you actually take into account how hostile space is you'll find that complex life, or life period, is statistically unlikely to exist at all.
[...]
Besides a civilization even as little as a thousand years ahead of us probably wouldn't even use radio any more. And they will probably be millions of years ahead if they even exist.

LOL! I don’t expect to find life just floating in space, but living on planets... :D

And I don’t understand why everyone seems to think that ET life has to be more advanced than us. What ever happened to being equal? :) There could also be the possibility that ET doesn’t have any fossil fuels on their planet - thinking that typical generative devices like engines to rockets would never have been thought of. Instead, everything would have been designed on the electrical. So, they (ET) may all have cars that run on hydrogen or electricity, and their scientists have figured out different ways to fly using “electroGravitics” ;) and have figured out better ways to send signals through space. At the same time, their children are still making mudpies, regular jobs are hard to find, cable tv shows are horrible just like here, and they still can get sick and die.

We may be equals, but just thinking differently.

 

[Entropy]

LOL! I don’t expect to find life just floating in space, but living on planets... :D

I think its blindly obvious I didn't mean in space.

And yes they will be either far ahead of us or far behind us because the chances of two civilizations emerging at the exact same time is very very unlikely. This isn't like Star Trek where somehow you have thousands of species at the same level.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Not to take sides by any means, but maybe technology levels off after a point. I don't think this is the case but even we may be near the end of our era fundamental discovery. So, it seems possible that all highly advanced species [whatever that means] will reach the same technological plane. It might just be a matter of phasers vs disruptors; so to speak.

I think the implicit assumption of endless advancement is overlooked in this regard.

 

[Evo]

Read up on the "Rare Earth Hypothesis" and you'll see what I mean.

A book with ties to "Intelligent Design" proponents and "creationists"? Nope, I'll skip it.

It made the bad pseudo science list of the Astronomical Pseudo-Science: A Skeptic's Resource List (Version 3.0; August 2003) of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific.

Frazier, K. "Was the 'Rare Earth' Hypothesis Influenced by a Creationist?" in Skeptical Inquirer, Nov/Dec. 2001, p. 7. The controversial book that suggests that planets and life like ours may be extremely rare may have been influenced by a young University of Washington astronomer who is secretly a creationist.

The article is here:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_6_25/ai_79794362

 

[Ivan Seeking]

"So here is a curious situation of a scientist actively seeking evidence that extraterrestrial life is rare to shore up a belief in divine design," Darling writes. "And doing it, moreover, without the knowledge of many of his peers, who are nevertheless being strongly influenced by work that is intrinsically biased."

Most interesting. Great post Evo!

 

[Entropy]

A book with ties to "Intelligent Design" proponents and "creationists"? Nope, I'll skip it.

It made the bad pseudo science list of the Astronomical Pseudo-Science: A Skeptic's Resource List (Version 3.0; August 2003) of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific.

Frazier, K. "Was the 'Rare Earth' Hypothesis Influenced by a Creationist?" in Skeptical Inquirer, Nov/Dec. 2001, p. 7. The controversial book that suggests that planets and life like ours may be extremely rare may have been influenced by a young University of Washington astronomer who is secretly a creationist.

The article is here:

I didn't even know a creationist wrote it. And when you say "creationist" do you mean one who believes that Earth was created like "poof! There it is!" or just anyone who believes that God started the universe? Anyways here is wear I first heard about it: http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw102.html. From what I read here, life is rare.

 

[BoulderHead]

Have you all heard the audio base for this signal?:
http://www.setileague.org/software/unknown2.wav

It does seem to sound like an 'Alien' source...

Sounds like an intra-galactic-web network signal between two superconducting computers with enhanced microprocessors...

How about a checkout counter at an intergalactic grocery store? :tongue2:

kewl stuff though!

 

[Evo]

Entropy, you're not alone. Apparantly a lot of people were unaware that the information was from a creationist/intelligent design proponent.

Yeah, creationism as in "poof" everything created just as it is now in only 7 days.

When I read the title I remembered having read about it a couple of years ago.

Again, so much is unknown that anything written on these subjects has to be taken with a grain of salt. People will always find information that supports their beliefs, and that applies to all sides of an argument. Some tend to try harder than others to remain objective, but it's not easy. I usually like to read different opinions whenever someone proposes something new, just as a means of "checks and balances".

 

[BoulderHead]

Yeah, creationism as in "poof" everything created just as it is now in only 7 days.

How about six days with one off to recuperate?

 

[Evo]

I didn't even know a creationist wrote it. And when you say "creationist" do you mean one who believes that Earth was created like "poof! There it is!" or just anyone who believes that God started the universe? Anyways here is wear I first heard about it: http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw102.html. From what I read here, life is rare.

I just read the link you posted and he is not agreeing with them. He is saying "here's another hypothesis".

 

[Ivan Seeking]

How about six days with one off to recuperate?

I guess omnipotence includes getting tired, if desired. I wonder what God does with a day off? Obviously he doesn't go to church.

 

[Evo]

How about six days with one off to recuperate?

OMG! You are correct, how could I have forgotten?

 

[Entropy]

I guess omnipotence includes getting tired, if desired. I wonder what God does with a day off? Obviously he doesn't go to church.

I don't mean to go off topic but actually the Hebrew word that was translated into "day" doesn't really mean "day" at all, it simply means an interval of time. I thought that was pretty neat when I found out about that.

Anyway back on topic. I want to talk about the sterializing effects of supernovae. Anyone know the blast radius that would kill life on a planet of a supernova? I think I heard that a good sized one could eliminate life on worlds within hundreds light years. I lack the math skills to calculate it and haven't much luck finding many pages/books on it.

 

[The Bob]

I don't mean to go off topic but actually the Hebrew word that was translated into "day" doesn't really mean "day" at all, it simply means an interval of time. I thought that was pretty neat when I found out about that.

Anyway back on topic. I want to talk about the sterializing effects of supernovae. Anyone know the blast radius that would kill life on a planet of a supernova? I think I heard that a good sized one could eliminate life on worlds within hundreds light years. I lack the math skills to calculate it and haven't much luck finding many pages/books on it.

Yer I know I love Hebrew. The language is a lot more explainatary than English.

SETI has only just started. If signals have been found then that would suggest 'aliens' are doing the same (or some prankster has made a radio signal that intrudes theirs :tongue2: ).

Personally I must say that there is no alien life in the universe. I may be proven wrong in years but I am still a man of my faith. I just try to link science and religion together.

The Bob (2004 ©)

 

[pelastration]

The Bob (2004 ©)

Bob, why putting this notice? Do you think your quotes are exclusive or never done?
I suggest you use it when you have something important to say.

 

[DarkAnt]

"Bob, why putting this notice? Do you think your quotes are exclusive or never done?
I suggest you use it when you have something important to say."

its just his sig, why so harsh?

 

[Evo]

Bob, why putting this notice? Do you think your quotes are exclusive or never done?
I suggest you use it when you have something important to say.

I like his sig.

 

[pelastration]

I like his sig.

That's the point. It a general sign, not his sign.
It's like an official statement that nobody may copy a specific text. The sign indentifies the author.

But it's not forbidden of course. Bob can use it.
Indeed Bob has copyrights on 'his' text whatever the content and his way to put it.
But say that he quotes from a newspaper and he puts "his sign" under the post he could have trouble since juridically he claims to be the author of the text.

 

[Nereid]

Should we also avoid reading anything written by Newton or Darwin? After all, they were clearly influenced by all kinds of strange and wonderful religious-based ideas

"Rare Earth", IMHO, is well worth reading; if you don't want to buy a copy, then check it out from your local library. Perhaps I could start a thread, specifically to discuss the approach Ward and Browlee use, the assumptions, etc!

I'll see if there's a copy of Darling's book in my local library, sounds like it could also be a good read.

The article to which Evo gives a link says: "Darling begins with a point-by-point scientific critique of the Rare Earth hypothesis. The hypothesis essentially says that for life to evolve and survive beyond the microbial stage a very special combination of factors must prevail (such as presence of a large moon to stabilize the planet's orbit, a Jupiter-size planet to sweep up killer asteroids, the occurrence of plate tectonics, and a sun with high "metallicity") and that these other factors are both rare in themselves and absolutely indispensable to complex life. Darling examines each in turn and concludes that the hypothesis is based on circular reasoning and that the proponents have fallen into the trap of going out of their way to find reasons why Earth is special." Well, I'll reserve judgement on how good a summary of Darling's thesis this is, but as a summary of Ward and Brownlee's, it stinks. For a start, like all good scientists, the Rare Earth authors are at pains to point out the tentative and provisional nature of all their conclusions, so "absolutely indispensable" is hardly accurate.

Next, 'circular reasoning'. Trouble with SETI, and much of astrobiology, is that we have a sample of but 1, so it must surely be nigh on impossible to avoid 'circular reasoning', no matter what thesis is being proposed.

Further, with just this sample of 1, you could always show that personal hopes intrude into one's thesis; they will in Darling's work, and they clearly did in Sagan's (just read the http://www.planetary.org/html/UPDATES/seti/Contact/debate/default.html for a flavour of how one's professional background colours one's views of SETI).

Finally, shortcomings in Ward and Brownlee's work: lots of little ones, and some bigger ones. Perhaps the most glaring - and also the most difficult to overcome, given our sample of 1 - is that they look too narrowly at 'complex life', finding the conditions for it to arise, on a planet just like Earth, rare. But if they'd gone the other way - speculated about how complex life could arise in entirely imaginary planetary systems, for example - they'd have been strongly criticised for unwarranted speculation (and rightly so too; hard observational data on other 'solar systems' isn't sufficient to build any kind of decent case on)

One thing puzzles me though; the SCICOP review says that the Rare Earth hypothesis has been "... embraced by the religious right as vindication of their belief in the special nature of the Earth." Isn't the Earth 'special' no matter what? After all, it's our home. And how does complex life on Earth being rare (if it turns out to be) be of comfort to 'the religious right'? Seems like desperate clutching at straws to me.

 

[xild]

No one knows for sure what caused this signal. There is a slight possibility that it just might originate from an extraterrestrial intelligence. The bright colors on the blue background indicate that an anomalous signal was received here on Earth by a radio telescope involved in a Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI)

Reference:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020728.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0207/unknownseti_cavan.jpg

You may want to call Art Bell on this, on Coast to Coast AM, next weekend, or write him. He said last night that no signals have been received by Seti, and eventually, they may have to close if they continue to get nothing.

 

[Geoffrey F. Miller]

If any of you are into SETI, try sending this signal back into outer space. You should get a flood of signals in a few days to a few years to a few decades from it.

http://philosophyforums.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/aliens.wav

 

[Nereid]

And I don’t understand why everyone seems to think that ET life has to be more advanced than us. What ever happened to being equal? :) There could also be the possibility that ET doesn’t have any fossil fuels on their planet - thinking that typical generative devices like engines to rockets would never have been thought of. Instead, everything would have been designed on the electrical. So, they (ET) may all have cars that run on hydrogen or electricity, and their scientists have figured out different ways to fly using “electroGravitics” ;) and have figured out better ways to send signals through space. At the same time, their children are still making mudpies, regular jobs are hard to find, cable tv shows are horrible just like here, and they still can get sick and die.

We may be equals, but just thinking differently.

The main reason is time ... homo sap.'s understanding of the physics (and hence technologies) that we use to do our SETI is extraordinarily young; Newton couldn't have built a radio telescope, let alone Archimedes ... and that time period is <10,000 years, which is but ~0.005% of the time since complex life appeared on Earth. What if "ET" communicates using some subtle properties of neutrinos or dark matter? We poor homo saps know very little about neutrinos and are essentially clueless about DM! (But look how far we've come ... in <100 years!)

 

[Nereid]

Should we also avoid reading anything written by Newton or Darwin? After all, they were clearly influenced by all kinds of strange and wonderful religious-based ideas

"Rare Earth", IMHO, is well worth reading; if you don't want to buy a copy, then check it out from your local library. Perhaps I could start a thread, specifically to discuss the approach Ward and Browlee use, the assumptions, etc!

I'll see if there's a copy of Darling's book in my local library, sounds like it could also be a good read.

Found it, read it. It's a review of the current state of astrobiology, written by a science writer. In this it differs considerably from "Rare Earth"; it isn't out to make one case or another.

The article to which Evo gives a link says: "Darling begins with a point-by-point scientific critique of the Rare Earth hypothesis. The hypothesis essentially says that for life to evolve and survive beyond the microbial stage a very special combination of factors must prevail (such as presence of a large moon to stabilize the planet's orbit, a Jupiter-size planet to sweep up killer asteroids, the occurrence of plate tectonics, and a sun with high "metallicity") and that these other factors are both rare in themselves and absolutely indispensable to complex life. Darling examines each in turn and concludes that the hypothesis is based on circular reasoning and that the proponents have fallen into the trap of going out of their way to find reasons why Earth is special." Well, I'll reserve judgement on how good a summary of Darling's thesis this is, but as a summary of Ward and Brownlee's, it stinks. For a start, like all good scientists, the Rare Earth authors are at pains to point out the tentative and provisional nature of all their conclusions, so "absolutely indispensable" is hardly accurate.

Well, the SCICOP review of Darling stinks too. :grumpy:

Darling's book devotes only one chapter (out of 9) to the Rare Earth ideas, their authors, the influence of the creationist, politics and US funding for astrobiology (etc). In fact, Darling is quite careful to give the ideas in Rare Earth - and the authors - credit for quite a lot. Darling is also careful - though perhaps not so fastidious as Ward and Brownlee - the emphasise the tentative nature of all astrobiological results, and states clearly that there are no compelling observations (etc) which rule out the Rare Earth idea.

Darling's examination of the weaknesses of the Rare Earth idea is somewhat selective - he looks at 'A Large, Nearby Moon', 'Catastrophic Impacts', 'Extrasolar Planets', Jupiter's Protection', 'Metalicity', and 'The Galactic Habitable Zone'; he doesn't look at plate tectonics. As Darling's intention is a review, he is able to take each of these 6 points and present some counters; fair enough. What's lost, perhaps, is the range of views on each item, and the extent to which they're inter-related - i.e. a single, coherent 'Common Earth' case.

Further, some of Darling's own counters to the 6 Rare Earth items are weak, and one has already been overturned - there is now considerable evidence that planetary systems are rare in low metallicity environments (at least, systems with Jovian-sized planets).

Next, 'circular reasoning'. Trouble with SETI, and much of astrobiology, is that we have a sample of but 1, so it must surely be nigh on impossible to avoid 'circular reasoning', no matter what thesis is being proposed.

It seems that the 'circular reasoning' critique is of the SCICOP reviewer's making; Darling spends some time - as does everyone serious in this field - talking about the limitations of a single sample.

 

[canopus]

How many areas does seti scan ( i maynot express myself clearly) ? Could you give me an exact number?