Slashdot Mirror
New Telescope Array Goes Live For SETI
The Skinny writes "Today is a historic day for the SETI program. The New York Times reports that astronomers are flipping the switch today on the Allen Telescope Array — 350 antennas, each 20 feet in diameter — which will, among other things, extend the search for extraterrestrial life a thousandfold. From the article: ' There are some 200 billion stars in the galaxy, and a significant fraction of them have planets. Estimates of the number of intelligent civilizations in the galaxy have ranged from one (or none, if you are particularly discouraged about human affairs) into the millions. Dr. Shostak calculated that the full Allen array would be able to detect a signal from as far as 500 light years that is only a few times more powerful than what can now be sent by the Arecibo radio telescope, a 1,000-foot-diameter dish in Puerto Rico that is the world's largest (although it is in danger of being shut down to save money). That translates to about a million stars, which he said was getting into a promising number. Dr. Shostak described the expanded search as looking for the needle in the proverbial haystack with a shovel instead of a spoon.'"
Although I agree with the rest of your comment, I don't think burning money is wasting it. If you destroy currency you are removing it from circulation, which will cause prices to go down due to deflation.
If you truly want to waste money, you should buy something of value to others and destroy that thing. The grandfather post would be right, if one assumes that scientific research has no value. However, that is very seldom the case. Research is almost always valuable, even if it turns up nothing. Negative results are also knowledge. If we find no sign of extraterrestrial intelligence in our search we will know more than we did before about the abundance or scarcity of intelligence in our galaxy.
"I think SETI is a hopeless pipe dream."
.211m. The brightness temperature of the galaxy as viewed from Earth's surface is around 5-10 Kelvin at that wavelength.
.211) = 4.63*10^18 meters
I assume you think your erroneous application of signal theory leads to that conclusion. More studious and clever people than you have already illustrated the viability of signal reception at these distances, and your analysis is quite simply wrong. Your "EE" expertise has led you astray: when you ask someone who only knows about whales a question about ducks, he talks about whales anyway. Radio astronomy has had these things down for more than 50 years, and you're a day late and a dollar short.
We're interested in obtaining a signal against a background. The antenna temperature, Ta, determines this:
Ta = [(pi^2)/16k] * (W/r^2) * (D1^2 * D2^2) / lambda^2
where
k is Boltzmann's constant
W is the power per unit of bandwidth of the source
D1 and D2 are the diameters of the receiving antenna and (hypothetical) transmitter antenna
lambda is the wavelength
The signal, per the common example, is 1420.4GHz => 21.1cm =
What about the noise temperature of the receiver? A receiver must have sufficiently low Tn, otherwise it's louder than the signal it tries to measure:
Tn-rms = Tn / sqrt(t * Bw)
where
Tn-rms is the root-mean-square value in question
Tn is the noise temperature of the receiver in question
t is the integration time (how long we keep the lid off the photon bucket)
Bw is the receiver's bandwidth
The noise temperature of modern low-noise amplifiers is much lower. A rule of thumb for present-day: 1 Kelvin per GHz, plus 1 Kelvin, so 2~3 Kelvin for this LNA, and there are lower noise devices available for a price, but only to a point. The cosmic background noise is larger than the receiver noise!
Let's combine them and rearrange, and see just what kinds of power and distance we need:
r = (pi/4) * sqrt(W / k*Tn) * (D1 * D2 / lambda) * (t * Bw)^.25
Suppose we have a 50kW transmitter, use the 300m Arecibo dish to transmit and receive, use a bandpass of 1Hz (this is reasonable), and an integration time of about 20 minutes (1,000s). Go ahead; do the math--
r = (pi/4) * sqrt(50000 / [(1.38e-16)*3] * (300 * 300 /
Which is 489 light years.
Yes, given currently manufactured technology, the Arecibo dish could communicate with an identical dish at exactly the distance in the article, given a modest 50kW transmitter. I picked numbers to contrive the distance in question, but all of them are available with current technology, and most of them are already installed and operational at Arecibo Observatory. What if we chose a MW transmitter (available), or halved the wavelength to 10cm, or used a bigger (perhaps virtual) dish, or a lower noise antenna? All of these things would MASSIVELY improve the resolvable range of the transmission. 5000 light years is well within our current technology-limited broadcast/reception range. The hard part, as discussed by others here, is justifying implementing this much hardware and employment (versus buying ONE SINGLE JET FIGHTER).
If you think the problem with SETI lies in its technical shortcomings, you're sorely mistaken. The SETI program is a long shot for other, more difficult scientific and borderline philosophical reasons, but close examination of the physical problem at hand (which you clearly have not done) illustrates that it's not as long as your cynicism would have you judge in lieu of actual thought. You're welcome to argue your opinions, but don't mis-apply one inapt little corner of signal theory as proof that your perception of the world is, in fact, reality.
+5 Insightful? The mods have been bamboozled by unfamiliar equations. As for my analysis? Go ahead-- verify it with your favorite relevant textbook, for a change; please.