Slashdot Mirror


Making It Hard For Extraterrestrials To Hear Us

quaith writes "US astronomer Frank Drake has told scientists at a special SETI meeting in London that earthlings are making it less likely that we will be heard in space. In the past, we used huge ground stations to broadcast radio and television signals which could be picked up relatively easily — according to astronomers' calculations anyway. Now we use satellites that transmit at 75 watts and point toward Earth instead of into space. In addition, we've switched to digital which makes the transmissions even fainter. Drake has concluded that very soon, in space no one will hear us at all. I guess we'd better keep listening."

67 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. Not news by l2718 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This issue was already known to Drake when he formulated his famous equation -- a key parameter is the time window during which a civilisation is broadcasting radio signals.

    1. Re:Not news by Da+Cheez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Correct me if I'm wrong (I very well may be; I'm not overly familiar with the Drake equation), but doesn't that broadcasting time apply mainly to before a civilization has the technology to broadcast? What about when they still broadcast, but in such a way that their signals don't pollute deep space? Is that taken into account?

    2. Re:Not news by Supurcell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So even if we do happen to pick up radio signals from the 100 or so year window, during which aliens would be broadcasting radio waves, by the time we hear them, they could have been long extinct due to some catastrophe.

    3. Re:Not news by Mashhaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is why the Drake equation never did seem to make much sense to me.

      Given the rapid advancement of telecommunications technology we've observed, to me it seems entirely possible that a civilization a few hundred or thousand years beyond ours might not even be using a technology analogous to RF transmission. Entanglement, gravitation manipulation, something entirely different?

      We can only imagine, because who can say what discoveries the future will hold, but you can be damn sure that a thousand years from now we'll be using something different than we are now. The Drake equation always seem to me to require the presupposition that a far advanced extraterrestrial civilization would be using the equivalent of.. cosmic flag semaphore, or smoke signals.

    4. Re:Not news by BryanL · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but the assumption was that civilizations stopped broadcasting into space because they ceased to exist. Now we can think, maybe there are civilizations out there that are extant, but past the point of radio broadcasts. This is good news if we hope that intelligent life is still out there.

    5. Re:Not news by pengin9 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes xkcd says it best yet again.

    6. Re:Not news by amRadioHed · · Score: 4, Informative

      The last factor in the equation is L, the length of time a civilization broadcasts radio waves into space.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    7. Re:Not news by amRadioHed · · Score: 4, Informative

      Reading the wikipedia page further, it seems like his understanding of L is that it represented how long a technological society would be capable of broadcasting into space. So it seems like he didn't actually consider that as technology advanced civilizations would significantly reduce the amount of stray emissions. As a result his guess for L was around 10000, a few orders of magnitude off it would seem.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    8. Re:Not news by amRadioHed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      His guess was that the broadcasts would last for 10,000 years. So yeah, he was thinking the radio emissions would last as long as the civilization was capable of producing them.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    9. Re:Not news by Devout_IPUite · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The other thing to consider is how many even bother with EM transmission instead of using wires or tubes.

    10. Re:Not news by hitmark · · Score: 2, Insightful

      i would say we humans have actually increased our use of EM transmissions the last couple of decades. But said transmissions are shorter range then the EM thats been broadcasting since the start of the 1900's.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    11. Re:Not news by jibjibjib · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why do people keep suggesting entanglement as a future communication technology? It doesn't transmit any information. (And if you say "But what if it does and we don't know yet?" then you're not talking about entanglement, you're talking about some random undiscovered physics and using the wrong word for it.)

    12. Re:Not news by fyngyrz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No. Civilizations that have moved far beyond radio for their own use will still understand that radio is an easily discovered, created, and maintained technology with great range and excellent economy. If such a civilization were to wish to keep track of emerging civilizations (a good idea, as the earlier it is done, the less dangerous they will be), they would keep radio reception going. Given our knowledge of physics, it seems that radio is as fast as anything can be - light speed - and so it would provide as quick a "heads-up" as anything else.

      Radio transmission presumes they want to contact us. The only observation I can make here is that aside from a few, seriously underfunded and rather pitiful attempts, we're not trying to contact anyone else, though we certainly could be, technically speaking. Assuming that some other civilization wants us to find them... that may be the problem.

      Of course, if a civilization is up to creating an optical telescope of multiple light years across using aperture synthesis... they can just watch us (time delayed), if they're close enough. Sounds impossible - and it is, for us at the moment - but any civilization that can start an automated process and has a few systems worth of raw material to draw upon should be able to do it, given time.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    13. Re:Not news by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 2, Funny

      Be sure to broadcast all the information that was included on the Voyager probes... you know, like our physiology and location... it's hard to plan a menu if you don't know what you will be using as the entree. Hey, we could end up as the secret ingredient on some sort of galactic "Iron Chief" program!

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    14. Re:Not news by frieko · · Score: 2, Informative

      Digital wires interfere with each other via RF. There's no way to make a DSP chip complex enough to do digital voice or video without first having a very firm grasp of RF. Meaning "primitive" digital transmissions would be on-off keying at 100 baud or something like that. Which is as detectable from space as AM radio.

    15. Re:Not news by rworne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A great book on the early discovery of sentient species by a superior species:

      The Killing Star

      Relativistic weapons impacting earth from outer space with Michael Jackson's "We are the world" warbling in over all the radio frequencies.

      Great book.

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
    16. Re:Not news by plover · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is why the Drake equation is correct, but useless. Every factor in it is a guess that slides along a scale from "observational estimates" to "wild assed". And by careful selection of just the right guesses, you can come up with a number that suggests dumping truckloads of money into SETI is worth it. But any one of those numbers can skew N to less than one in a heartbeat.

      And now, with just one the values that they based the decision to build SETI on reduced by three orders of magnitude, based on just 50 years of observation, that means that the wilder guesses could be even worse than they imagined.

      SETI is a waste of money and resources. Participating in it is like participating in the lottery, only with a higher cost of entry and a lower chance of payoff.

      --
      John
    17. Re:Not news by domatic · · Score: 2, Informative

      Parent post is making a Star Control 2 reference.

  2. Sufficiently Advanced by Da+Cheez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So if a sufficiently advanced civilization (like ours) eventually develops radio technology that doesn't get far beyond their own planet, could this severely limit how much we would detect from other planets in the way of radio signals?

    1. Re:Sufficiently Advanced by itsdapead · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Imagine a sphere of radio transmissions expanding at the speed of light from every civilized planet - sooner or later these are going to permeate space, so if you can't detect anything it starts to look a bit odd.

      Now imagine that civilizations typically switch to non-broadcast and/or digital signals (the latter, if efficiently compressed, will "sound" like random noise) within a century of inventing radio. Instead of spheres, space will be full of 100 light year thick "shells" of easily detectable signals. So its far more likely that we find ourselves in one of the gaps between shells.

      Of course, the Drake equation/Fermi paradox ideas are only plausibility arguments, make all sorts of assumptions about how civilizations develop based on extrapolation from one data point (us).

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  3. This has its perks by mysidia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It reduces the probability that earth could be quickly located.

    We gotta consider the possibility, that any extraterrestrials close enough to hear our signals in any reasonable amount of time, and with the sophistication to pinpoint us....

    Might have the technology and desire to invade earth.

    E.g. Consider earth itself... fast forward a few dozen generations...... massive overpopulation, lack of resources, land, severe overcrowding.

    Extreme desire for another habitable place to live.

    And then you detect an alien signal.. a foreign world. You step foot there, and you're greeted by basically an aboriginal species (compared to your civilization).

    Habitable world, massive resources, very primitive 21st-century level technology, nothing compared to your 23rd century tech.

    Oh.... so some colonists start travelling from earth to 'the new world' for a better life.

    Settlers VS the Natives all over again.

    It's happened before, it could happen again. Except us earth inhabitants could be the primitive natives / "Indians" / etc.

    Scary, huh? :)

    1. Re:This has its perks by nitro316 · · Score: 2, Funny

      James Cameron? Is that you?

    2. Re:This has its perks by grouchomarxist · · Score: 2, Informative

      It would be easier for us to inhabit the Moon or Mars or the oceans or underground or where ever than to go to a new solar system. I imagine that by the time a civilization has the power to go to another solar system for colonization issues of overcrowding would be overcome by technology. If they can get here they'll probably either come for research or just to fuck with us.

    3. Re:This has its perks by Jeremi · · Score: 5, Interesting

      [Aliens] might have the technology and desire to invade earth.

      Not if they have any economic sense in their heads. Unless the aliens have some sort of magic infinite energy source or teleportation device, the cost of transporting an invasion fleet to another solar system would be orders of magnitude higher than the value of anything they could possibly gain from Earth. And if they do have an infinite energy source or teleportation device, then they could use those inventions to provide for their needs directly, without leaving their home.

      So if aliens invade, it will be for solely their own entertainment, not for economic reasons.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    4. Re:This has its perks by cetialphav · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I imagine that by the time a civilization has the power to go to another solar system for colonization issues of overcrowding would be overcome by technology.

      I'm sure the Native Americans that occupied North America would have thought that about the Europeans, too.

      It is really hard to make any assumptions about why aliens might show up on our doorstep. There are logical explanations for why a peaceful, curious society would make the journey, but there are equally logical explanations for a hostile society. Certainly, the ability to develop long distance space travel means that a society has a high level of organization and cooperation. But we have seen that here on earth with both the United States and Nazi Germany. We also know that military conflict can be a great motivator to developing some kinds of technology, so visitors to earth might arrive in warships.

      The bottom line is we just don't know and no explanation seems any more plausible than any others.

    5. Re:This has its perks by eclectro · · Score: 2, Funny

      So if aliens invade, it will be for solely their own entertainment, not for economic reasons.

      Unless they invade so they can suck our brains with a straw. Which case that would be for both entertainment and economic reasons.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    6. Re:This has its perks by mysidia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm presuming the extraterrestrials have developed technology to travel between galaxies in a few months or less.

      I wouldn't expect a space ship to be usable as a comfortable living environment for extended periods of time.

    7. Re:This has its perks by Exception+Duck · · Score: 2, Interesting

      maybe they wouldn't need a big fleet.

      just one virus

      or nanobots - grey goo us all...

      to stop the pink goo*

      *: Pink Goo is mankind. It replicates relatively slowly, but some people think it will nevertheless fill any amount of space given enough time. In the pink goo worldview the spread of humanity is a catastrophe and space exploration opens up the possibility of the entire galaxy or the universe getting filled up with Pink Goo - the ultimate crime, something to be stopped at any cost.

    8. Re:This has its perks by j_sp_r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe they need "Lebensraum", because there are not many planets that sustain life?

    9. Re:This has its perks by kitezh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are other galaxies closer than Andromeda. The Small Magellanic Cloud is a dwarf galaxy, located only 200,000 light years away. The Large Magellanic Cloud is 160,000 ly, and there are two others even closer (also dwarf galaxies), with the closest only 25,000 ly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canis_Major_Dwarf_Galaxy) from Earth.

    10. Re:This has its perks by Jeremi · · Score: 3, Funny

      We are in the XXI century just are beginning to see the Fusion Reactor [...] and I am certain I will die seeing one working efficiently.

      Now there's an ominous sounding prophecy... :^)

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  4. Fermi Paradox by localman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And this is a possible answer to the Fermi paradox. Well, after you accept that interstellar travel is not economically feasible.

    Broadcast is not a great communication strategy. On-demand point-to-point communication takes over most things. Advanced civilizations go silent from the outside within a blink of them transmitting their first broadcast signals. There's no reason to think that we'll ever put serious effort into sending signals into the black given all the other things on our plate. And there's no reason to think that any other civilization would have such extra resources either.

    Cheers.

    1. Re:Fermi Paradox by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And this is a possible answer to the Fermi paradox. Well, after you accept that interstellar travel is not economically feasible.

      Except no-one in their right mind would accept that. The cost of an interstellar colonisation flight would be small compared to the value of another solar system, and the cost of not expanding to other solar systems would be the death of our species.

      Given that any alien race who chose to expand could colonise the entire galaxy in under ten million years without even trying hard (or a hundred million years without trying at all, just by tourists on a random walk), the answer to the Fermi Paradox is simple: there aren't any... if they existed, they'd be about as hard to spot as technological life in Manhattan.

    2. Re:Fermi Paradox by precariousgray · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And there's no reason to think that any other civilization would have such extra resources either.

      I think it's a pretty ignorant statement to presuppose that any other civilization in the universe will necessarily irreparably rape and exploit their planet for resources as badly as we humans have.

      --
      not much, just being forced to manually insert line breaks into my comment
    3. Re:Fermi Paradox by Bartab · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except no-one in their right mind would accept that. The cost of an interstellar colonisation flight would be small compared to the value of another solar system, and the cost of not expanding to other solar systems would be the death of our species.

      The economic return of interstellar colonization is zero.

      The only return is darwinistic. Not all our eggs in one biological basket, and all that. However, unless we're damn sure the target system has an earth-like breathable, survivable biosphere, then we may as well stick to this system. We're not exploiting most of it at all. We -might- find an oxygen atmosphere, heated water laden, near-1g planet "nearby" (100 ly) but it's unlikely. What's nearly impossible is finding one with a biosphere that we can survive in without basically obliterating it and dropping down earth biologicals. Most things on such a planet would poison us.

      Unless such a magical planet is found, exploring outside our system before serious colonization (which -could- be economically valuable) of Mars, gas giant moons, etc is a waste. On all levels.

      If such a planet was found, I'd consider it proof of god.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
    4. Re:Fermi Paradox by bit01 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The economic return of interstellar colonization is zero.

      The economic return of life is zero. Pretty pointless expending all that energy to be worm food.

      You need to remember what economic value is - anything that people value and are willing to pay money for.

      And a lot of people think that extending humanity's reach is pretty damn valuable. You might not agree but different people have different values.

      ---

      DRM'ed content breaks the copyright bargain, the first sale doctrine and fair use provisions. It should not be possible to copyright DRM'ed content.

    5. Re:Fermi Paradox by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 2, Funny

      If such a planet was found, I'd consider it proof of god.

      Tonight, on CNN: Disparate religions have suddenly voiced a unanimous desire to fund space exploration.

    6. Re:Fermi Paradox by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the Western world, the economic return of having children is often considerably less than zero. Yet people keep doing it. I wonder why? Could it be that there are more things to consider than simple economics? I think that just might be possible.

      Why do you think finding an Earth-like world within 100 light years is "unlikely"? We have already discovered worlds with liquid water. Unfortunately, so far they have been far too large for us... but that's just because the big ones are easier to find. In just the last year we have found several planets closer to earth's size.

      Given our actual experience of the last couple of years, I don't think it's "unlikely" at all. I think it's quite likely indeed.

      Maybe you just haven't been keeping up with the recent news?

  5. This is good... by VendettaMF · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is good news. And overdue.

    We've been a stupidly noisy duck for far too long.

    --
    kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
  6. so what by Punto · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the closest aliens are at least thousands of light years away, they haven't "missed" our radio signals, they still haven't heard them yet. And they'll have like 100 years of signals to figure us out.

    --

    --
    Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!

    1. Re:so what by Supurcell · · Score: 3, Funny

      And when they do see those signals, they will shit themselves when they see how good we are at killing aliens and promptly call us up to surrender.

  7. perhaps by wizardforce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Considering how the meeting between two civilizations, one more avanced than the other has generally gone badly for the majority of human history, it may not be such a bad idea to keep ourselves quiet until their intentions are shown to be peaceful/cooperative.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    1. Re:perhaps by nedlohs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, more advanced.

      Violence doesn't matter, since it makes no difference whom initiates, so if the less advanced civilization is more violent the end result is the same as if the more advanced civilization is more violent.

  8. Correct me if I'm wrong... by AnotherUsername · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was under the impression that historically, our radio and tv signals didn't even make it to Alpha Centauri. Unless we suddenly discover extra-terrestrial life inside of our solar system, does the switch to digital really change anything? Correct me if I am wrong, please.

    --
    I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    1. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong... by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Radio waves spread in accordance with the inverse square law. For every doubling in distance traveled, they become 1/4 as strong. It may well be that the *practical* limit for detecting our own tv/radio signals is somewhere near Alpha Centauri, but that's a limit imposed by our own equipment. The signal propogates forever, or at least until it's stopped by another planet/star/comet/dust/whatever. And space is mighty vast and mighty empty.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    2. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong... by bkeahl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Alpha Cenrauri is about 4-1/2 light years away. Electromagnetic energy would get there in 4-1/2 years. As a result, they've long since lost interest in I Love Lucy (if anyone is there and listening). There are about 50 stars within 15 light years. We can't uncap that bottle, so we'll have a stream of broadcast television and radio signals continuing on the journey, lasting for decades. The fact we stop doesn't mean we're suddenly invisible. We've left some tracks in the sand on a calm beach. I'm pretty confident we don't have an invasion fleet coming at this point in the game, but if they are, I bet they think we taste like chicken.

  9. More to the point by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do we WANT to be detected? Oh it would be wonderful if we could communicate with intelligent life somewhere other than earth (I am assuming there is intelligence here). But what if the species we contact are not peaceful? What if they're out looking for worlds to enslave? There certainly would be an advantage in staying quiet and being the first to "discover" a new civilization without giving up our own presence. That way we could study these new beings before deciding whether to risk contact or not.

    Likewise, the same logic can be applied to an alien species. Why would they trust us? Why would they carelessly beam their presence out into space, not knowing who was going to listen in? It is certain, given our past history (you know, that part about strong humans usually ending up wiping out weaker ones through conquest), that we ourselves aren't exactly trust-worthy. Maybe they have heard us, and we failed the test, and we will never meet our neighbors. That is one possibility the "Drake Equation" fails to account for. Maybe we will be permanently assigned to the universe's "time out" box, because of our bad behavior - and we'll never know.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:More to the point by bhartman34 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That is one possibility the "Drake Equation" fails to account for.

      There's a lot the Drake Equation fails to account for. As a mathematical estimate, it's fairly useless. Its chief contribution to science (although some might question whether this is a contribution) is that it gets people talking about extraterrestrial life.

  10. Find US? by Rammed+Earth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has anyone considered the historical evidence of what happens when superior civilizations encounter lesser ones? The Native Americans, the Mayans, the Incas, the Australian Aborigines, the tribes of South America, the natives of Pacific Islands, to name a few, all cry out to humanity to avoid at all costs encounters of the first, second, and third kinds. We have no reason to expect anything but annihilation from advanced alien races- either they are truculent and violent like we are, or they will destroy us as a service to the rest of the galaxy. We do not wants aliens to find us!

    1. Re:Find US? by syousef · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Has anyone considered the historical evidence of what happens when superior civilizations encounter lesser ones? The Native Americans, the Mayans, the Incas, the Australian Aborigines, the tribes of South America, the natives of Pacific Islands, to name a few, all cry out to humanity to avoid at all costs encounters of the first, second, and third kinds. We have no reason to expect anything but annihilation from advanced alien races- either they are truculent and violent like we are, or they will destroy us as a service to the rest of the galaxy. We do not wants aliens to find us!

      Not a problem, unless they're very long lived or really have found a faster than light travel mechanism. Civilizations that were conquered on earth were all reachable well inside a human lifetime. What's more the civilizations all had things of value to the invaders - land, resources, natives to indoctrinate in their religion. Any civilization sufficiently advanced to invade would likely be able to obtain their resources more locally, and colonise more local uninhabited worlds. I would hope they're past superstition, but who knows.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    2. Re:Find US? by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Funny

      Has anyone considered the historical evidence of what happens when superior civilizations encounter lesser ones?

      No, as it turns out, you're the first person ever to consider it. The first person in the entirety of human history. Even as I type, the Nobel Committee are holding an emergency session to create a new honour that's significant enough to even begin to recognise the enormity of your insight. Do not leave your home: a team of crack sculptors are en route to measure you up for your 400 foot tall solid gold statue.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Find US? by pydev · · Score: 2, Informative

      Has anyone considered the historical evidence of what happens when superior civilizations encounter lesser ones?

      That analogy doesn't work. Among other things, aliens can't mate with us and they're probably not going to carry pathogens that can infect us, and those two factors strongly influenced the outcome of European colonization.

      (Like Europeans, aliens may be religious nuts bent on destroying our religion and replacing it with their own, but that seems somewhat unlikely.)

    4. Re:Find US? by khallow · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yea, if anything you want bling sculptors. He'll also receive a twenty pound gold necklace with three inch lettering that says "I FUCKING SAVED THE HUMAN RACE" to wear on formal occasions.

  11. Re:Why can't we hear ET? by Toonol · · Score: 5, Funny

    I keep asking this question: Why can't we detect ET's transmissions?

    DRM'ed, no doubt.

  12. Don't forget "Active SETI" by l2718 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There have been several attempts at sending radio messages into space specifically for communication purposes. Whether we keep that up or not is independent of our use of radio for intraplanentary communications.

  13. Why? by Tibia1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why are so worried about finding aliens right now? Its like a child trying to throw a paper plane to the top of a mountain. We need better technology and it will be here soon. Best not worry where we're pointing our signals at the moment.

  14. Maybe this is a good thing? by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Funny

    In nature, young defenceless animals which make too much noise and bring attention to themselves often get invited to dinner by predators. Discuss.

  15. Re:Good. by cetialphav · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The flip side, of course, is that monitoring for radio signals is extremely cheap. It uses equipment that we already use for other purposes and a small number of researchers. The potential upside is huge, though. Discovering that an advanced civilization exists somewhere is such a big deal that there is no reason not to do something cheap and easy to find it.

    I agree that the odds are stacked against us and that it is unlikely that we find anything. Even if we are lucky enough to pick up a signal, establishing communications would be difficult. The odds are stacked against us, no question. But we are a curious species and we just can't pass up an opportunity to learn something, especially when it costs us so little.

  16. could be sexual reasons by r00t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you're an alien dude who wants to score with the alien chicks, you might just impress them by collecting humans. You could embed a human in a chunk of pure carbon-12 diamond, mount that in an iridium ring, and slip it onto her tentacle. She might have thousands of tentacles.

    Maybe you collect humans to sell as an aphrodesiac. You puts the heads on top of a snack, kind of like sea urchin eggs on sushi.

    Maybe you lay eggs in the humans. Ever see that movie with the pods? The aliens take over human bodies. An infected human passionately embraces an uninfected human, and then the alien penis-thing (an ovipositer maybe?) bursts out of the infected person's forehead and stabs right into the uninfected person's forehead.

    Maybe you even mate with the humans. You keep them in your flying saucer and rape them with **all** your tentacles in every oriface. When the alien babies are ready to be born, the humans explode.

    1. Re:could be sexual reasons by Supurcell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It sure would suck for an alien species to evolve to have to come all the way out to earth and use humans as part of their reproductive cycle.

  17. That's what's wrong with SETI by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been critical of SETI efforts for this reason. Much SETI effort was focused on looking for "carriers", big constant-frequency RF sources. Broadcast AM, FM, and analog TV (which was AM video, FM audio) have strong carriers, but that was hugely inefficient. About 80% of an analog TV station's power output wasn't conveying any information other than "We're here". As receivers improved, new RF technologies used weaker carriers, then suppressed carriers, and finally, with spread spectrum, dropped the whole concept of carriers. Many modern RF signals appear to be noise unless you understand the encoding. (The same thing happened to modems decades ago; at 300 baud, you heard tones; at 9600 baud and up, it sounded like white noise.)

    I once pointed out to a speaker at Stanford promoting some SETI scheme that they couldn't detect any emission that the FCC would now license for a new application. He admitted that was true. For our civilization, there was less than a century of high-powered carriers. That's a narrow window to hit for SETI purposes.

    Arguably, though, any sufficiently advanced civilization will monitor all RF passing through their solar system and will be able to detect anything which has a pattern which can be synched up. Although carriers are going away, all signals between distant points need some form of synchronization information. The synch information may be a tiny fraction of the transmitted data, but there has to be something upon which the receiver can lock.

  18. it's modulated by r00t · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We have large synchronized power grids. They'll get a signal that's 2x the line frequency. As the Earth turns, you get modulation of various sorts: frequency, phase, amplitude.

    Amplitude goes down for oceans, and up for land. You get more 100 Hz for the Old World, and more 120 Hz for the New World. As different country-sized areas with the same line frequency pass into view, you get phase change.

    It all has a nicely repetitive 24-hour period.

  19. Encryption in space by freedumb2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The smart aliens will use full encryption anyways so no way to tell any transmission apart from background radiation noise anyways. Think TrueCrypt plausible deniability ;)

    1. Re:Encryption in space by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Haha actually that's a pretty good thought. Good encryption should yield a signal resembling one of maximum entropy... meaning that it would hardly be distinguishable from noise.

      On the other hand, if it were not the data itself but the character of the signal that were detectable, that's another story altogether. For example, the equivalent of TCP/IP packets would be easily detectable as intelligent signals, regardless of the eventual content of those packets.

  20. Re:Why can't we hear ET? by syousef · · Score: 4, Funny

    I keep asking this question: Why can't we detect ET's transmissions?

    DRM'ed, no doubt.

    Dude, if only that were true! You'd find aliens just by searching the pirate bay!

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  21. Any sufficiently advanced intelligence ... by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 3, Funny

    I believe there is a general principle here that goes beyond the technology at hand: any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from white noise.

  22. In another galaxy... sentients are wondering... by garompeta · · Score: 3, Funny
    In another galaxy, a frustrated physics professor is in charge in a project equivalent to SETI:

    "Stultz, I wonder if there is actually life out there. We've been centuries monitoring the neno-kurflichsk time-fabric disturbance detector that any technologically advanced civilization should be sending out if...if... they sentients do exist. I mean, it is third grade stuff, anybody knows that time-fabric can be disturbed instantly, we keep doing it simultaneously to all the atoms of the universe, and still nothing for CENTURIES. Can you believe it?"
    "Professor, I wonder... I have this crazy idea... maybe other other advanced civilizations use... radiowaves?"
    "Stultz, you are an idiot or what?"
    "I...I am just saying, maybe some less advanced civilizations..."
    "Pluuhlease, that is enough! Are you serious? You should go back to elementary school. Have you forgot that radiowaves travel at the speed of light??, it is more than obvious that it is not the most convenient way to communicate with other civilizations... unless you want to wait another lifetime to send your response, and to where should we point the antennas, huh?. Have you forgot that we are talking about ASTRONOMICAL DISTANCES?? It would take centuries! Or even worse, those electromagnetic waves would be absorbed by black holes, bounced, even hit by the breshanistok matter! We would get nothing or everything scrambled, indistinguishable from white noise! Your question is simply retarded. We are trying to contact sentients, not idiots!"

    And professor Breshanistok stood up upset and the graduate student Stultz watched the glowing monitoring holoscreen scratching his head.