Slashdot Mirror


Sun's Twin Discovered — the Perfect SETI Target?

astroengine writes "There are 10 billion stars in the Milky Way galaxy that are the same size as our sun. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that astronomers have identified a clone to our sun lying only 200 light-years away. Still, it is fascinating to imagine a yellow dwarf that is exactly the same mass, temperature and chemical composition as our nearest star. In a recent paper reporting on observations of the star — called HP 56948 — astronomer Jorge Melendez of the University of San Paulo, Brazil, calls it 'the best solar twin known to date.' Using HP 56948 as a SETI target seems like a logical step, says Melendez."

168 comments

  1. Is it in Gemini? by zaft · · Score: 3, Funny

    First post?

    1. Re:Is it in Gemini? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      Maybe they'll call it "Germany"

      Maybe

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    2. Re:Is it in Gemini? by Psion · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's in the constellation Draco.

    3. Re:Is it in Gemini? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Draco Malfoy? Azabra kedabra!!1!!

    4. Re:Is it in Gemini? by xclr8r · · Score: 1

      Germany or Ironsky: http://www.ironsky.net/site/

      --
      Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
    5. Re:Is it in Gemini? by ozbird · · Score: 1

      There be dragons.

  2. Exo Plant first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It would be a good target to look for an Exo plant first. Then from spectral measurements see if it has the elements necessary for life (water, oxygen, etc...). Then it makes a good target for SETI to scan.

    1. Re:Exo Plant first by siddesu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wrong, then it makes a good colonization target. Fill the barges with androids and seeds NOW!!1

    2. Re:Exo Plant first by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2

      Wrong, then it makes a good colonization target. Fill the barges with androids and seeds NOW!!1

      But leave the sex-bot androids behind. I've been waiting for them to show up on the scene and would hate to see them all shipped off 200 light-years before I can even own one.

      --
      "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    3. Re:Exo Plant first by siddesu · · Score: 3, Funny

      You can have the prototype model, but don't ask why we left the teeth out.

    4. Re:Exo Plant first by jackbird · · Score: 1

      You have to ask?

    5. Re:Exo Plant first by siddesu · · Score: 1

      All body parts are now standard edition, even the foreskin and the facial hair. You have to circumcise it and teach it to shave if you prefer them that way.

    6. Re:Exo Plant first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But leave the sex-bot androids behind. I've been waiting for them to show up on the scene and would hate to see them all shipped off 200 light-years before I can even own one.

      'One'?

    7. Re:Exo Plant first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that poor poor QA team.....

  3. Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If there is a lifeform advanced enough to pick up the SETI signals, chances are they've had the technology for thousands of (earth) years. By contrast, just a couple hundred years ago we were reading books by gas lamps and traveling and sending messages by horse and carriage.

    Maybe they could organize an expedition to colonize this fertile planet 70 percent covered with liquid water, only 200 LY away? Of course, by that time the original SETI people would be long dead, having gone to their graves happy in the knowledge that they've advanced understanding between alien species...

    1. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by siddesu · · Score: 1

      What would be the incentive to organize such an expedition? Even if they are way ahead of us, it will be an enormous enterprise. I'm sure if they are so advanced, they would have to compare it with much better alternatives.

    2. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by mswhippingboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hopefully they will be advanced enough to know that SETI listens to signals, it does not send anything!

      --
      Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
    3. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe they could organize an expedition to colonize this fertile planet 70 percent covered with liquid water, only 200 LY away?

      If they're advanced enough to do that then they're advanced enough to have detected our planet and its composition long ago. If they wanted to colonize Earth then the plan would have already been put in place and SETI would have nothing to do with it.

      So don't worry. It's only a problem if these aliens are for some reason willing to travel 200 light years just to acquire a bunch of slaves. Maybe we should make it clear in our SETI broadcasts that we are very inquisitive creatures, but also lazy and difficult to train?

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    4. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The abstract says this star is 1 Gy younger than the sun. That other "earth" doesn't even have dinosaurs yet.

    5. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by hawguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If there is a lifeform advanced enough to pick up the SETI signals, chances are they've had the technology for thousands of (earth) years. By contrast, just a couple hundred years ago we were reading books by gas lamps and traveling and sending messages by horse and carriage.

      Maybe they could organize an expedition to colonize this fertile planet 70 percent covered with liquid water, only 200 LY away? Of course, by that time the original SETI people would be long dead, having gone to their graves happy in the knowledge that they've advanced understanding between alien species...

      I doubt there are any resources a spacefaring civilization could find on Earth that they couldn't find much closer to home. Asteroids and comets good sources of water and many metals and other elements. Unless they want fresh meat.

      Probably the only reasons to travel 200 light years to visit a developing culture are to study it, befriend it, or annihilate it so it doesn't become a threat later when it becomes more advanced.

    6. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does everyone assume that alien species must be so much more advanced than us, technologically? Your logic is immediately flawed in that WE can pick up the SETI signals and we haven't had the technology for thousands of Earth years, so why must every other species? And, the idea that any species that wasn't a very, very near neighbor to Earth would invade Earth, a populated and defended planet, for anything aside from the biomass itself, seems completely illogical to me. Many, many other planets have exactly the same resources as Earth. Hell, we just discovered that the moon and Mars have ice, so the assumption can be made that a comparable number of planets in many other solar systems do as well. Besides, the resources and energy required to travel even short distances in space are so astronomical, it doesn't seem economically likely that a species would make the trip just to fight a species over resources it could get elsewhere.

    7. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Kozz · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's great to go back and watch this particular episode of Carl Sagan's Cosmos: Encyclopedia Galactica. He goes through the basic idea of the Drake Equation, opines on listening/detecting life elsewhere in the galaxy. It's really great stuff, and worth watching whether you've seen it before or not.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    8. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      Hopefully they will be advanced enough to know that SETI listens to signals, it does not send anything!

      Who knows? Maybe they are so advanced that they can listen to those who are listening !!

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    9. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 0

      I doubt there are any resources a spacefaring civilization could find on Earth that they couldn't find much closer to home. Asteroids and comets good sources of water and many metals and other elements. Unless they want fresh meat.

      Probably the only reasons to travel 200 light years to visit a developing culture are to study it, befriend it, or annihilate it so it doesn't become a threat later when it becomes more advanced.

      Lebensraum.

    10. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      If we're that convenient to them, it's not very likely they'll be that interested in us.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    11. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the Earth. Life on it will likely have a different pattern of evolution. Maybe it does have dinosaurs. Maybe it never did.

    12. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why does everyone assume that alien species must be so much more advanced than us, technologically? Your logic is immediately flawed in that WE can pick up the SETI signals and we haven't had the technology for thousands of Earth years, so why must every other species?

      That's easy -- because the universe is really old it's vastly more likely that aliens evolved and developed civilization millions of years before we did -- or we are millions of years before them -- than it is that they are in the exact same 100-year window of technological development. The odds are literally astronomical.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    13. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Why does everyone assume that alien species must be so much more advanced than us, technologically?

      I wonder if somewhere far far away, there's a 12 tentacled stand up comedian (except he doesn't have legs, so he sort of squirms a bit higher than usual) saying - at this exact moment - "you know how dumb your average k'nez#brl is? Well 72 perdozquad are even dumber than that!"

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    14. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by 0111+1110 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Although passive SETI does not send messages, Active SETI (ASETI) or METI does precisely that. As a planet, we have already sent messages to Gliese 581 and a number of other systems. If I'm successful I will even start sending such targeted messages full time from a 20 meter dish in Argentina. Unfortunately my power levels and antenna size probably limit my messages to a radius of about 50-100 light years, but with very large receiving antennas such messages could travel, much farther, possibly out to 200 ly. My goal is to start a full time. 24/7 targeted beacon. Now that has not been done before, but it's only a matter of time. If I'm not successful in my lifetime surely someone else will be eventually. Even some less cowardly government programs like that of the open minded Ukranians do not shy away from sending messages. They just don't do so as part of a permanent program. I believe that will be left to amateur projects like my own.

      Does anyone know the declination and right ascension of this solar twin? I can't find any information on it from googling HP 56948. I'm guessing it probably has another more commonly used name.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    15. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Let me give you an analogy. It is possible that as you post this someone is posting an answer to your question at exactly the same time you hit the 'submit' button. So why don't you expect that your questions will be instantaneously answered as soon as you think them up, making all such posts utterly pointless? It is highly, highly unlikely that our nearest intelligent neighbors developed at exactly the same rate. If they developed even a tiny bit slower they would not have radio technology. So what's the alternative?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    16. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well guys.,, when the aliens come to enslave us and impregnate our women, you'll know who to blame!

    17. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What would be the incentive to organize such an expedition? Even if they are way ahead of us, it will be an enormous enterprise. I'm sure if they are so advanced, they would have to compare it with much better alternatives.

      A spot of tea? We'd make great pets? I could think of a million reasons why or why not to visit. Nearly all of the good reasons are non-malicious -- Greed would be a huge limiting factor for the malicious motives... Unless their planet is dying or something.

      Think of it this way: Let's say we discovered a TV Signal from an alien race that was less advanced than us? What would we do? Bet your bottom dollar the first (US gov) instinct would be: "Don't tell the public! They'll want to send a message, and that could mean war or our eventual demise." Regardless of the distance, as soon as word gets out to the public, every nerd's mom's sat dish is re-purposed and aimed at the distant planet and beaming them everything from GNU/Linux source code to Otherworldly Erotica. (Heh, here's one now!)

      Public support for NASA to launch a small satellite carrying a message of peace would be huge, regardless of the time it would take it to get there, and the near hopeless chance of it reaching anyone... Were we very much more advanced than we are now, it would be a huge scientific find and you can be sure that some of us would be making plans to stop by and say "hi".

      (You've obviously never met an Explorer or Mountain Climber.)

    18. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by siddesu · · Score: 1

      None of these has anything to do with the topic of _colonization_ by the scary, advanced aliens, which we're discussing. And I'm still not seeing what can justify the expense of a colonization attempt at a distance of 200 l.y.

    19. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Let's say we discovered a TV Signal from an alien race that was less advanced than us?"

      You mean 1000 channels and nothing on?

    20. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "My goal is to start a full time. 24/7 targeted beacon."

      Will you send all the Piratebay magnets?
      Just to annoy the **AA guys?

    21. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're advanced enough to do that then they're advanced enough to have detected our planet and its composition long ago. If they wanted to colonize Earth then the plan would have already been put in place and SETI would have nothing to do with it.

      How do you think we got here then?!

    22. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Actually the whole problem with the idea of SETI is the "analog window" as you would only get a few decades if you were lucky before they advanced beyond just blasting signals that could leave their system. I mean look at us, while we blasted analog signals out there for awhile now nearly everything we do is digital and MUCH lower power so it simply isn't gonna go very far, so if other civilizations develop along a similar path then likewise we would expect them to only broadcast for a VERY short time. Considering how vast space is and how small the analog window would be the odds that we would have our sat pointed in the right direction at the right time to pick up something broadcast during that analog window must be such a small chance it would probably be damned near impossible to calculate.

      I'm not saying that we shouldn't try, simply that unless/until we have some way to listen in every direction constantly the odds of hitting upon a signal even if there were thousands of civilized worlds would have to be frankly pure blind luck more than anything.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    23. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      Aliens would not need to come here for water. This keeps popping up in scifi and fantasy but the fact is, there is plenty of water frozen up in our Oort cloud on the fringes of nowhere to make it much easier and more convenient place to get water than bothering to come all the way to the inner planets, worry about stealing it or shooting it out with a bunch of trigger-happy people.

      How much frozen water is out there? More than all the water on the Earth, probably by several times over. And that's just our Oort cloud. It's likely that many planetary systems would have similar resources.

      If they want water, they would not even need to leave their home system to just grab a few comets and melt them down. Done. It is similar if minerals and other raw materials are needed, as noted in this week's asteroid mining news. You do not need to bother with Earth to get everything you need.

      BTW, using resources like this is entirely excluded from discussion about what makes a place habitable. We humans are so focused on flowing water, just the right temperatures, just the right this or that, we forget that a reasonably space-faring species would have the ability to use non-planetary resources like comets and asteroids and perhaps live in or on a constructed environment (a ship) rather than needing the so-called Goldilocks planet. We look so narrowly for this one way that life can exist as if we know all about life. It's sad. Look around the Earth: a billion species many of which live their own way. We have an example right here of the diversity of life and yet we ignore it.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    24. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      What would be the incentive to organize such an expedition? Even if they are way ahead of us, it will be an enormous enterprise. I'm sure if they are so advanced, they would have to compare it with much better alternatives.

      Perhaps they desire to serve man?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    25. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Immerman · · Score: 2

      Well, unless they were *extremely* close to us any civilization that we receive radio waves from is likely at least as advanced as us. Our first radio experiments were in 1887, first audio broadcast in 1906, and analog television broadcasts didn't start until the 1930s in Europe, the 1940s in the US. Add in a 200 year transmission time and the civilisation we just detected a crude television signal from is already in their mid 2100s. Admittedly their science probably wouldn't be advancing in the same manner as ours, but unless their understanding of radio transmission far outstripped their other sciences we'd have to assume that they're at least our technological equals.

      Still, lets send that signal, in another 130 years they'll start receiving our own crude TV broadcasts anyway, why not let them know we've spotted them. By that point none of the current politicians will be running for re-election (I hope), so what do they care.

      But why send a probe? (satellites by definition are in orbit) The energy required to get it there in less than a few thousand years could instead be spent building and powering the the worlds most incredible directional broadcast antenna with which to say hello.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    26. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

      SETI doesn't actually expect to receive radio leakage. So the analog window isn't really an issue. If a twin earth were orbiting Alpha Centauri A even the giant Arecibo dish would not be sensitive enough to receive even fairly loud leakage. The signals are far too weak, generally too low in frequency, and are quite often aimed tangentially to the planet surface and not at the zenith. Omnidirectional signals which might have a greater tendency to travel in the right direction are just too weak. None of it can really be distinguished beyond the noise floor even at 1 light year, let alone the 4.2 light years to the nearest star.

      It's always possible that alien technology could pick out our own pathetically weak signals from the noise at great distances, but I don't think we can even (realistically) imagine such technology. Perhaps a planetary scale antenna, like carving a paraboloid shape into one side of a moon or planet might allow the detection of leakage to a distance of Alpha Centauri, but obviously we don't have anything like that yet.

      Passive SETI hopes to detect either an omnidirectional galactic beacon of pulsar-like magnitude or a directed beam from a source that is deliberately attempting to communicate with us. If this seems tremendously unlikely to you then you understand the problem with traditional SETI. Even if we are surrounded by technical civilizations there is no reason to expect that they know we are here and even if they know they may choose not to attempt communication for various reasons.

      I don't think anyone has ever attempted to send a signal to Alpha Centauri for instance. Our closest neighbor. A sun-like G class star. We've had the technology to send a signal since radar was invented before WWII and we have chosen not to do so. Admittedly, for a while it was believed that such a binary system would not allow life to evolve, but still. It would have been quite easy for us to do. Passive SETI relies on a whole bunch of unlikely scenarios or a whole lot of intelligent civs in our part of the Milky Way. It relies a bit too much on getting lucky.

      That's why I prefer Active SETI. If you believe a particular star system might have intelligent life then first say hello and then only after enough time has passed for a response do you actually listen. Or just await the arrival of the invasion fleet. Either way you've made contact.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    27. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "analog window" hypothesis ignores the fact that our radar signature has only increased further and further. There's no good replacement for radar when it comes to tracking stuff, and the bigger the civilzation, the more stuff it's going to track in its solar system.

    28. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      If we could get a space ship to that galaxy, how long will it take to get there, and can we provide sufficient food and entertainment. Is that ship the Noah's arc of some future?

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    29. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they want pets? We would make interesting pets.

    30. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      We'll make great pets.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    31. Re:Maybe I'm paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have a website with more information about your project?

  4. Yeah by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    "Only" 200 light years. Sigh.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's practically next door.
      200 ly as percentage of our galaxy radius.

    2. Re:Yeah by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Comparing something incredibly huge to something several orders of magnitude bigger might make the first seem small in comparison, yet it's the mathematical equivalent of a straw man argument: the fact remains that 200ly is an impossible distance, not "practically next door". In fact the first man-made radio signals haven't even reached it yet, assuming they were powerful enough to be detected. And those are travelling at the speed of light, not some miniscule fraction of it.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is nothing straw man about it. In terms of extra solar system travel those are the relevant scale sizes.

    4. Re:Yeah by rsborg · · Score: 1

      In fact the first man-made radio signals haven't even reached it yet, assuming they were powerful enough to be detected. And those are travelling at the speed of light, not some miniscule fraction of it.

      But they will. So we may need to send "seed ships" out into space, "manned" by software/AI and traveling for centuries/millenia. It is possible, just not in the standard "space opera" sense.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    5. Re:Yeah by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      200ly is obviously absurdly far compared with, say, popping down the shops to buy a pint of milk. But if we're talking about communicating with, observing with a telescope, or sending objects to another solar system, 200ly is about as good as it gets.

      If you could travel at 0.08c (which was one estimate of what Project Orion could have managed), it would take 2500 years to travel 200ly. Not exactly convenient, but not the millions of years you'd need to reach most places in the Galaxy.

    6. Re:Yeah by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But if we're talking about communicating with, observing with a telescope, or sending objects to another solar system, 200ly is about as good as it gets.

      So you consider having to wait 20 generations (it's a round trip, remember) to hear the answer to your question, if there is an answer, "communicating with" someone? You believe it's possible to "send an object" 200 light years, when it has taken almost 40 years to send an object around 3 light-HOURS away from earth (Voyager 1 is about 120 AU from us now).

      I think there is a problem with the wiring of the human brain; when people see the number "200" somehow this is a familiar number used regularly by people. $200 for groceries. $200 for a hotel. $200 here, and there. The brain obviously skips over the difficult-to-understand light year part and just sticks with good old familiar "200".

      I argue that 200 light years is as good to us as 2 million light years. We will never get there. Ever. The rest of your argument consists in believing in magic like project Orion which completely ignores passengers being fried by cosmic radiation at 0.08c even if all the other "minor technical details" could be worked out. And then there is the slight problem of a 2500 year trip when compared to an organism that lives at best 70 or 80-odd years with few exceptions. There are only a few structures humans have ever built that have lasted 2500 years or more, and even then they did not endure unscathed. Entire civilizations have come and gone in that time span. What makes you think a complicated space-craft could be kept running for that amount of time?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    7. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sending warm meat in cans out to space is silly.But no one in his/her right mind would actually build a genration ship. The engineering efforts to recreate a habitable environment for thousands of years are just to overwhelming. Especially if there are other, more cost-efficient alternatives around. Either we'll use a suspended-animation approach or we'll go virtual. Everthing else doesn't make sense.

    8. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are only a few structures humans have ever built that have lasted 2500 years or more, and even then they did not endure unscathed. Entire civilizations have come and gone in that time span. What makes you think a complicated space-craft could be kept running for that amount of time?

      I'm generally inclined to agree with your broader thesis, but boy are you a pessimist, to the extent that your pessimism clouds your analysis (call it the anti-Kurzweil effect). Human structures that have lasted 2500+ years were built by the humans of 500+ B.C., with the technology and materials of that time, and have sat on earth in the wind and rain, etc, etc, etc. Sending a ship through inter-stellar space will have its own challenges, that's true, but damn that was one hell of false analogy.... (particularly as I can only presume you were trying to support your assertion that mankind will "never" achieve such a thing).

    9. Re:Yeah by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      So you consider having to wait 20 generations (it's a round trip, remember) to hear the answer to your question, if there is an answer, "communicating with" someone? You believe it's possible to "send an object" 200 light years, when it has taken almost 40 years to send an object around 3 light-HOURS away from earth (Voyager 1 is about 120 AU from us now).

      No, not really. You are of course basically right.

      The only real benefit of having something "near" like this would be for observation. You'd be far more likely to build a telescope that could resolve these potential exoplanets 200ly away than ones 20,000ly away. Ditto for trying to pick SETI radio signals out of the cosmic soup- nearer the better. Both of which would still be pretty exciting if alien life were involved, even if direct contact is impractical.

    10. Re:Yeah by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      A kilometer-scale Orion ship with a cruising speed of .08c would take 12.5 years to travel 1 light year.
      ETAs for a some interesting destinations (ignoring acceleration times):

      Alpha Centauri A/B: 54 years 6 months. (1 gen)
      Sirius A/B: 107 years and 6 months (2-3 gens)
      Epsilon Eridani: 131 years (3 gens)
      Procyon A/B: 142 years and 6 months (3 gens)
      61 Cygni A/B: 142 years (3 gens)
      Epsilon Indi: 148 years (3 gens)
      Tau Ceti: 148 years 9 months (3 gens)
      Gliese 876: 191 years 3 months (3-4 gens)
      Groombridge 1618: 198 years 7 months (4 gens)
      Gliese 581: 253 years 9 months (4 gens)
      Gliese 667: 276 years 3 months (4 gens)
      Beta Canum Venaticorum: 344 years (6 gens)
      Zeta Reticuli: 489 years 6 months (8 gens)
      55 Cancri: 503 years 9 months (8 gens)
      HD 10307: 515 years (8 gens)
      Gliese 1214: 529 years 9 months (8 gens)
      18 Scorpii: 566 years 3 months (9 gens)
      HD 10180: 1587 years 6 months (25 gens)
      HIP 56948: 2500 years (38 gens)
      PSR J0108-1431 (closest pulsar): 9778 years (151 gens)
      V4641 (closest black hole): 20,000 years (307 gens)
      galactic center: 325,000 years (5000 gens)
      Andromeda galaxy: 32,500,000 years (500,000 gens)

      That should give some perspective on 'close' and 'far'. So even Sirius would be out of direct reach with the best possible (city scale nuclear pulse ship) technology we could use if we cannot design a life support system capable of more than a single generation.

      Obviously robots do not require life support per se, but having some humans aboard to fix things and to deal with unexpected problems would be awfully nice. We could probably build a kilometer scale nuclear pulse ship in orbit within a timeframe of 100-300 years if we were willing to spend the money (we are not), but we almost certainly will not have human-level AI by then. So life support would represent a major barrier if we hadn't thought of a solution by the 23rd or 24th century when we were ready to launch our first interstellar ship.

      With current tech (and a lot of money and time) we could make direct contact with our closest solar twin system in 2500 years. Allow another 200 years to receive communications from the ship and the total time would be 2700 years. Another 300 years to actually build the ship and you get a nice even 3 millenia. So it is hard to think of it as close, but it certainly is close if you compare it to the nearest pulsar or black hole or our galactic center.

      Needless to say there are quite a few interesting targets that are much, much closer and would require only between 3 and 8 generations instead of 38. Gliese 581 and 667 are pretty interesting and would only require 4 generations. Although thinking about a quarter of a millenium makes me impatient.

      A 54 year trip to Alpha Centauri would take just about 1 human lifetime. That would be a good test outing for our first ship. After that we should have a much better idea of the kinds of problems to expect from longer missions. Giving birth in interstellar space? The success of that would be very important and would have to be tested.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    11. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poppycock. We *will* get there. However long it takes. This is what humanity does: we exploit new environments and adapt to them. The timeframe may be absurd (it'll likely take thousands of years), but we will get there (assuming there are planets to be gotten to).

      Communication is unimportant. Humanity will colonize the stars and each colony will be completely independent. Assuming we don't find a way to warp space or otherwise overcome the light-speed barrier, we'll take baby steps into the Universe instead of giant leaps that our imaginations render. It may be boring. It may not live up to the sci-fi stories. But we will get there and with no thanks to naysayers such as yourself.

  5. Re:Star count by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TFS clearly says "the same size as the sun", dippy. Learn to read.

  6. Pointless? by hawguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless we think a civilization is intentionally sending out beacons to the universe, isn't SETI pointless?

    As our communications technology improves, it becomes lowered powered (unlike my old 3W car phone, my curren cell phone only puts out 300mW of signal max) and the leakage from hundreds, or thousands, or millions of point sources of RF signals becomes more and more like "white noise" to someone that doesn't know how to decode it thanks to spread spectrum signals and high bandwidth data encoded in the streams.

    The days of 100,000+ watt AM radio transmitters will likely end soon, so there won't be nearly as much leakage to the cosmos.

    So there's probably a 100 year window in a civilization's development where its unintentional broadcasts are detectable.

    Will we ever intentionally send out a beacon advertising our existence, knowing that it would likely take 100 years or more before any potentially inhabited planet would receive it? And if we do think there's other life out there, do we really trust it enough to tell it where we are?

    1. Re:Pointless? by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 5, Informative

      don't know how to break this to you so i'll just say it... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_Golden_Record

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    2. Re:Pointless? by hawguy · · Score: 1

      don't know how to break this to you so i'll just say it... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_Golden_Record

      I think it's safe to say that Voyager (or Pioneer) probes will never be found. Space is big. Very big. Voyager is small. Very small.

      I think the Star Trek scenario of a Voyager probe being used as target practice by a Klingon warship is equally likely as it being found at all.

    3. Re:Pointless? by bonehead · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't forget this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message

      There have been many intentional messages sent.

    4. Re:Pointless? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Active SETI

    5. Re:Pointless? by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 2
      ok, but that's not what you asked.

      Will we ever intentionally send out a beacon advertising our existence, knowing that it would likely take 100 years or more before any potentially inhabited planet would receive it? And if we do think there's other life out there, do we really trust it enough to tell it where we are?

      the answer is yes. a long time ago.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    6. Re:Pointless? by hawguy · · Score: 2

      ok, but that's not what you asked.

      Will we ever intentionally send out a beacon advertising our existence, knowing that it would likely take 100 years or more before any potentially inhabited planet would receive it? And if we do think there's other life out there, do we really trust it enough to tell it where we are?

      the answer is yes. a long time ago.

      Well, that's not really what I asked. A small piece of low speed space junk that has no chance of discovery is not the same as a radio beacon.

      Bonehead's response below is exactly what I asked about, but it's interesting that they directed it at a star cluster 25,000 light years away knowing that in 25,000 years it will no longer be there.

    7. Re:Pointless? by Algae_94 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I like how they mention that the 23 row by 73 column interpretation is "jumbled garbage". The correct image also looks like jumbled garbage. I especially like the image of a human. How the hell is an alien supposed to figure out what that is without having seen a human before?

      It is really expecting a lot out of an alien to receive this signal in all the space they could be looking at, determine that the modulation of the signal corresponds to binary digits, then determine this number of bits is semi-prime and can be arranged in a grid to pictorially represent the data, make sure they arrange it correctly, decipher what is essentially a cave drawing made by a species that may have close to nothing in common with them, and actually care enough to write back.

    8. Re:Pointless? by hawguy · · Score: 2

      I like how they mention that the 23 row by 73 column interpretation is "jumbled garbage". The correct image also looks like jumbled garbage. I especially like the image of a human. How the hell is an alien supposed to figure out what that is without having seen a human before?

      It is really expecting a lot out of an alien to receive this signal in all the space they could be looking at, determine that the modulation of the signal corresponds to binary digits, then determine this number of bits is semi-prime and can be arranged in a grid to pictorially represent the data, make sure they arrange it correctly, decipher what is essentially a cave drawing made by a species that may have close to nothing in common with them, and actually care enough to write back.

      It would be interesting to release that radio stream in some code breaking challenge to see how easy it is for an earthling to decode the message. Though most of the people that would participate in such an event probably already know about this message.

    9. Re:Pointless? by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1
      it is precisely what you asked. i quoted you word for word.

      Will we ever intentionally send out a beacon advertising our existence

      not the same as a radio beacon.

      you didn't say "radio" beacon. and yes, that is interesting. makes you wonder why we can't see our own earth in near-distant space, if we're actually looking at objects in the past.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    10. Re:Pointless? by Iron+Condor · · Score: 2

      An oldie, but a goodie: http://www.ibiblio.org/lunar/alien.html

      --
      We're all born with nothing.
      If you die in debt, you're ahead.
    11. Re:Pointless? by tboulan · · Score: 1

      Will we ever intentionally send out a beacon advertising our existence, knowing that it would likely take 100 years or more before any potentially inhabited planet would receive it? And if we do think there's other life out there, do we really trust it enough to tell it where we are?

      Every time we fire up a powerful military radar we intentionally send out a beacon advertising our existence.

    12. Re:Pointless? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great post.. SETI is indeed pointless

    13. Re:Pointless? by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      They will be detected by the gamma ray bursts emitted by the nuclear warheads used in their epic space battles because we all know if an intelligent being is not war like they will never develop past being food.

    14. Re:Pointless? by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      So there's probably a 100 year window in a civilization's development where its unintentional broadcasts are detectable.

      Exactly. A civilization will go unnoticed if we don't detect its emissions that originate from the brief instant (relatively speaking) between their invention of radio and their understanding of information theory.

      And if we do think there's other life out there, do we really trust it enough to tell it where we are?

      It has, indeed, been pointed out that this is a really bad idea. Safe to say any other intelligent civilizations will reach similar conclusions.

      So, yeah, SETI is pretty much a waste of electricity.

    15. Re:Pointless? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Another one who thinks SETI listens for radio leakage. It doesn't. Let's just leave it at that since you obviously didn't feel the subject is even worthy of a brief google.

      Also google for METI while you're at it. Whenever your conclusion seems to be that you are far more intelligent than a large group of scientists it may be time to check your premises. It is far more likely that you are the one who is ignorant or stupid.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    16. Re:Pointless? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does not matter anyway. By the time the our signals reach the heliopause, they are wrecked and destroyed by the interference there. It is a huge filter keeping our signals from reaching out, and also keeping other signals from getting in.

      For SETI to work, they need to have a remote station at or outside the heliopause. Until then, we won't hear anything and the LGMs won't hear us either.

    17. Re:Pointless? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my god, talk about being a pedantic nerd. Sometimes, in conversation, things are implied. Like in this conversation about radio transmissions, "a beacon" means a radio beacon. This inability to grasp subtlety and nuance is why your co-workers never invite you to go out with them on Friday night.

    18. Re:Pointless? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      I hadn't heard that the heliopause causes so much EM interference? Do you have a reference for that? Is it broadband or does it only affect a narrow range of frequencies?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    19. Re:Pointless? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad we told them about GMail

    20. Re:Pointless? by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

      you've got rocks in your box over "radio" beacons and i'm the pedantic one? here's a clue, dipshit: there are lots of kinds of beacons and people aren't psychic so being specific, if you mean a specific type of something, is actually helpful in conveying your idea. since you don't have a single one of those, it's no surprise all this is lost on you. i implied, about 3 replies ago, that i wasn't considering beacon to mean "radio" beacon. too bad your inability to grasp subtlety and nuance prevented you from noticing that. just admit you weren't aware of any other kind of beacon that could be interpreted in that context. just admit it, dumbass. i should also point out that the properties of a radio beacon do not make it uniquely suited to fit your example. your question can easily be summed up as "will we ever intentionally advertise our existence..." etc etc etc. if your fear is trusting alien life, what specifically about radio beacons disqualifies any other kind of intentional advertising?

      btw, it's my co-workers' inability to grasp subtlety and nuance you should be worried about. i won ~$8000 playing poker last friday night. and you're a dumb fuck.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
  7. Would be AWESOME... by oliverk · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...if what we were seeing was actually ourselves, just 400 years ago. A wormhole, acting as a mirror...floating at the point they're looking at?
    C'mon...you can dream, can't you?

    --
    ---- Please be nice in case my Slashdot karma ~= my real life karma.
    1. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh shit, warn them about Germany.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    2. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, warn them about George Orwell and civilized countries :P

    3. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you ever wonder what they talk about warning US about in the future?

    4. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The feedback loop would "instantly" render a temporal wormhole useless/unstable/collapsed, as I understand it...

    5. Re:Would be AWESOME... by jamesh · · Score: 1

      I had the same thought. A giant mirror in the middle reflecting everything (not just light). And if the planet appears 200 light years away then the mirror is 100 light years away and we are seeing ourselves 200 years ago, it should start getting noisy fairly soon!

    6. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or worse/better, 400 years in the future. Turns out, we don't really exist - we're just some temporal reflection.

    7. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      yeah, their sausages cause horrible heartburn.

    8. Re:Would be AWESOME... by jamesh · · Score: 2

      You fucking idiot. We don't know where they'll be in 200 years because we're moving and they're moving, plus getting a mirror to hit a planet that far away is fucking impossible. Learn something about optics.

      Seriously... that's the only hole in that little thought experiment?? You can do much better than that.

    9. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is, the star is a billion years younger than our sun:

      The similarities between HIP 56948 and the Sun are astonishing. HIP 56948 is only 17+/-7 K hotter than the Sun, and log g, [Fe/H] and microturbulence are only +0.02+/-0.02 dex, +0.02+/-0.01 dex and +0.01+/-0.01 km/s higher than solar, respectively. HIP 56948 has a mass of 1.02+/-0.02M_Sun and is 1 Gyr younger than the Sun

    10. Re:Would be AWESOME... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck Germany, warn them about the USA! Oh! The Humanity!

  8. it's actually the same sun in a funhouse mirror by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

    there's only one star in the whole universe. the universe appears to have more stars because it is has a multi-faceted inside wall -- like an inside-out disco ball -- with each facet being a crazy, warped funhouse-style mirror. this happens to be one of the few mirrors with the least amount of warp. ain't that a bitch?

    --
    insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    1. Re:it's actually the same sun in a funhouse mirror by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      Close. It's our sun, but in the evil twin universe. Or are we the evil twin? Hard to say, really.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:it's actually the same sun in a funhouse mirror by superdave80 · · Score: 1

      I'll bet I look damn sexy in a goatee. I can't wait to meet my evil, bearded twin!

    3. Re:it's actually the same sun in a funhouse mirror by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 4, Informative

      Close. It's our sun, but in the evil twin universe. Or are we the evil twin? Hard to say, really.

      Hoping that we are the Evil Twin. The women are always better in the Evil Twin Universes.

      --
      "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    4. Re:it's actually the same sun in a funhouse mirror by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      Oh, crap. I have a beard. Guess that means....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    5. Re:it's actually the same sun in a funhouse mirror by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      this happens to be one of the few mirrors with the least amount of warp. ain't that a bitch?

      What's really going to be a bitch is when Voyager finally smashes into the facet it's heading towards and breaks it into a gazillion shards. 7 years of bad luck at the very least...

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    6. Re:it's actually the same sun in a funhouse mirror by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Actually, cutting my beard into a goatee did get the ladies more interested in me. I don't think most women care too much for the RMS look.

  9. Hmmm by koan · · Score: 1

    That's an 800 year round trip for information exchange, I wonder how many other intelligences would be spewing radio waves willy nilly not to mention we haven't even been using radios long enough for that star system to receive anything from us.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Hmmm by bonehead · · Score: 1

      200 light years away would make it a 400 year round trip for radio communications.

      Where did you come up with 800?

    2. Re:Hmmm by SomeJoel · · Score: 5, Funny

      1) Send a message, "Hello, are you out there?"

      2) 200 years later..., "Yes we are, is there something we can help you with?"

      3) 200 years later..., "Can you give us the secret to faster than light travel?"

      4) 200 years later..., "Obviously not."

      Total time: 800 years.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    3. Re:Hmmm by SomeJoel · · Score: 1

      1) Send a message, "Hello, are you out there?" 2) 200 years later..., "Yes we are, is there something we can help you with?" 3) 200 years later..., "Can you give us the secret to faster than light travel?" 4) 200 years later..., "Obviously not." Total time: 800 years.

      I forgot (5).
      5) 200 years later..., "Ok, never mind then."

      Now the total time is 800 years.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    4. Re:Hmmm by geekoid · · Score: 1

      3) We're looking for faster then light drive.

      4) no thanks, we all ready got one, you see

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Hmmm by geekoid · · Score: 2

      6) ok, you hang up first.
      7) no, you hang up first.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Send a message, "Hello, are you out there?"

      2) 200 years later..., "Yes we are, is there something we can help you with?"

      3) 200 years later..., "Can you give us the secret to faster than light travel?"

      4) 200 years later..., "Obviously not."

      Total time: 800 years.

      I forgot (5).

      5) 200 years later..., "Ok, never mind then."

      Now the total time is 800 years.

      No, still wrong. From our perspective:

      1. "Hello are you out there?"
      2. 200 years later, they receive message, send "Yes we are, how can we help?"
      3. We receive first response (400 years total now)
      4. We send "Can you teach us FTL travel?"
      5. They receive the additional response (600 years total now)
      6. They reply "No, sorry"
      7. We receive their message (totaling 800 years now)
      8. We reply "OK nevermind"
      9. They receive the message, for a total of 1000 years

    7. Re:Hmmm by swalve · · Score: 1

      4) 200 years later..., "Obviously not."

      Brilliant!

    8. Re:Hmmm by belthize · · Score: 1

      1) Receive a message "Yes we do"

      2) 5 years to decode and decide to send a message "Hello we heard you"

      3) Receive a message "clearly not"

      4) 5 years later to decode and send a message "It seems you are out there"

      5) Receive a message "Stop and think"

      6) Ponder 20 years and send "Do you have time travel"

      7) Few weeks later "and do you think we'll invent it"

      8) 700 odd years later send "why did you stop sending messages to us"

    9. Re:Hmmm by NemoinSpace · · Score: 3, Funny
      No, still wrong. From our perspective:

      1. "Hello are you out there?"
      2. 200 years later, they receive message, send "Yes we are, how can we help?"
      3. We receive first response (400 years total now)
      4. We send "Can you teach us FTL travel?"
      5. They receive the additional response (600 years total now)
      6. They reply "thank you for holding, can you verify your phone number please"
      7. We receive their message (totaling 800 years now)
      8. We hang up in a panic, realizing our entire planet has been outsourced.

    10. Re:Hmmm by koan · · Score: 1

      You have to say hello first, it's only polite.

      *think about it*

      The truth I read 400 instead of 200.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    11. Re:Hmmm by tomhath · · Score: 1

      1) Send a message, "Hello, are you out there?"

      2) 200 years later..., "Hello, my name is Julie. Is there something I can help you vith?"

    12. Re:Hmmm by PPH · · Score: 0

      I wonder how many other intelligences would be spewing radio waves willy nilly

      Rush Limbaugh?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    13. Re:Hmmm by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      800 years, and neither of your civilizations has figured out that you can pipeline multiple communications to save time?

      Apathetic bloody planets, I've no sympathy at all.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    14. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I said "intelligences" that excludes Rush.

  10. Yeah, lets try to talk to them. by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    "Hey Meepzorp, those creatures orbiting Zfeskew 73875.24543 are trying to communicate with us."
    "Man the relativistic bombs."

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  11. Re:Great. So scan it. by BradleyUffner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tell us what you find. Until then... who the fuck cares?

    Astronomers, people who like astronomy, and people interested in science, just to name a few.

  12. I think we're one of the first intelligent life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Universe is what 13 Billion years old? The only elements at the beginning were Hydrogen, helium, and lithium.

    First generation of stars create some heavier elements but still nothing for building life. They go nova and what have you. So after the first generation of stars, we're not at what? 5 Billion years?

    Now we need a second generation of stars for the heavier elements like iron and carbon. So, now we're at 10 billion years?

    Now come our generation of stars with elements in their planetary disk that can build life.

    I think we are very much alone and eventually, WE will be the super advanced being that space faring future of aliens will be in awe of.

    1. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Interesting

      First generation of stars create some heavier elements but still nothing for building life. They go nova and what have you. So after the first generation of stars, we're not at what? 5 Billion years?

      Massive stars create elements all the way up to iron in their normal life span and all the heavier elements when they go supernova. They have lifespans measured in tens of millions of years.

      It doesn't necessarily take a long time to go through several generations of stars. I thought I'd read recently that we'd found extremely old metal-rich stars indicating that they had in fact gone through several generations rapidly.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by Algae_94 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There has been close to 4 billion years of life on Earth. All it would take is another world that started that chain of evolution just a few hundred years earlier, or to have, by chance, evolution form sentient life a few hundred years faster, or one of countless other variable changes, and we are not the first sentient life in the universe. When time lines are that long, you can't just hand-wave and say, "yeah, there was enough time for humans to evolve, but no way could it have happened already"

    3. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by bhagwad · · Score: 1

      Yup - the bigger a star is, the faster it burns through its fuel.

    4. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But is tens of millions of years enough to create those heavy elements?

      And were there enough of them early on in the Universe to have created enough heavier elements so that life - especially intelligent life - is relatively common?

      The numbers in the GP were averages of total star populations and Scientific American had an article on stars were the one with a lifespan of 5 or so billion years were the ones that created the heavier elements and went super nova - IIRC. I can't find the issue right now.

    5. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But is tens of millions of years enough to create those heavy elements?

      Yes. It is the same fact of being extremely massive that causes them to burn through their hydrogen fuel quickly that allows them to subsequently fuse additional elements up through iron until they undergo a core-collapse supernova.

      And were there enough of them early on in the Universe to have created enough heavier elements so that life - especially intelligent life - is relatively common?

      Actually the theory is that there were much more massive stars, and more of them, in the early universe, than form today.

      Whether that results in sufficient density of heavy elements in some parts of the galaxy to support early development of terrestrial planets, I just don't know.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all of that didn't happen in the rest of the universe why?

    7. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      First, a second generation star could have planets that support life.

      Second, the stars that form supernovas don't last long, millions of years, not billions. Many generations of heavy stars had time to form and die before our solar system was formed. A system with similar elemental composition or even heavier could have formed billions of years before ours did.

      Third, even if it did take ten billion years before conditions were right for the formation of a star system that could support life, that formation happened all over the galaxy. There's nothing peculiar about our sun. It has many thousands of peers in the galaxy, and our planet has many thousands of peers -- sort of earthlike mass planets of similar composition residing in an earthlike irradiation zone around their stars.

      There's no reason at all to think we're the first. We just don't know enough to say that. Maybe life is kind of unusual even on planets that can support it. Or maybe every planet that can support it has life after a few million years. Maybe life almost never evolves to complex forms or maybe it almost always does, given a billion years or so.

    8. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by oiron · · Score: 2

      And recalling that the planet has faced quite a few mass extinctions, wiping out all the "progress" (I use the word guardedly, of course) that evolution had made upto that point, even if another planet started off at exactly the same time as us, its equivalent of the dinosaurs could have become sapient 65 billion years ago...

    9. Re:I think we're one of the first intelligent life by tweakerbee · · Score: 2

      65 billion years is quite unlikely, as the age of the universe is estimated at a little under 14 billion years. 65 million should be about right.

  13. Re:Great. So scan it. by bhagwad · · Score: 2

    For starters, I do. Some of us like to keep track of endeavors as they happen and not merely be at the receiving end of a "finished product" announcement.

  14. spin up the stargate and dial it! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    spin up the stargate and dial it!

  15. Seriously? by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 3, Funny

    Seriously, there are 10 billions stars essentially equivalent to our Sun, but you have to go 200 light years to find the closest one?

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like the universe is really big or something, right?

    2. Re:Seriously? by Soralin · · Score: 2

      It's just a matter of how high your standards are for something to be essentially equivalent. I mean, Alpha Centauri system is about 4.37 light years away, Alpha Centauri A is about 10% more massive than the Sun, Alpha Centauri B is about 10% less massive than the Sun. I say "Eh, close enough".

    3. Re:Seriously? by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Because there are something like 200 billion stars in the Milky Way. Feeling insignificant yet?

    4. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of them must much closer to the core ... I mean if the galaxy is 1000 light years thick by 100000 light years in diameter, then there are an average of 100 stars like our sun for every cubic light year, and our closest neighbor star is 4.6 ly away.

      Seems to me given the relative vacuity of our arm of Ole Milky 200 ly away is probably close to median expectations.

  16. Wrong name by gvanbelle · · Score: 4, Informative

    The star's ID isn't HP 56948, but HIP 56948 (from the Hipparcos satellite catalog), aka HD 101364, SAO 15590...

    1. Re:Wrong name by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      The star's ID isn't HP 56948, but HIP 56948

      No, it's really a giant HP printer. It's where all your lost print-jobs have been going.

    2. Re:Wrong name by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Thank you. Target acquired. With a declination of 69 degrees this is definitely a northern star. I won't be able to reach it from my location. Most interesting nearby targets are in the southern hemisphere. This is a rare exception.

      In the constellation Draco. Apparent magnitude 8.7. It shouldn't be too hard to find with a telescope in a nice dark sky.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    3. Re:Wrong name by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      The star's ID isn't HP 56948

      I believe the only authoritative answer to this is what the star reports over its GPIB interface in response to the '*IDN?' command.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Wrong name by grcumb · · Score: 1

      The star's ID isn't HP 56948

      I believe the only authoritative answer to this is what the star reports over its GPIB interface in response to the '*IDN?' command.

      SCIENTIST: PC LOAD LETTER? What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  17. Re:Great. So scan it. by Gilmoure · · Score: 3, Funny

    Exactly! What was the score from last nights game and what has Britney Britney been up to this week?

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  18. Yellow dwarf by freeasinrealale · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does this mean our sun is a yellow dwarf??

    --
    A man spends the first half of his life accumulating stuff, the second trying to get rid of it all.
  19. From the silly metaphors department by rcbutcher · · Score: 1

    Twin ? Clone ? Rubbish : similar but unrelated is more like it.

    1. Re:From the silly metaphors department by bbecker23 · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. I'd be willing to bet they share a parent somewhere along the line.

      --
      cat /dev/random > sig.txt
  20. Same Age? by hemo_jr · · Score: 1

    If it is the same age as well as chemical composition, both our sun and HIP 56948 may have been born out of the same stellar nursery. This would make it an even more amazing find.

    But, unless it has terrestrial planets in the Goldilocks zone, it is unlikely to to be a real prospect for SETI.

    1. Re:Same Age? by slew · · Score: 2

      ...But, unless it has terrestrial planets in the Goldilocks zone, it is unlikely to to be a real prospect for SETI.

      If you actually read the paper, it appears from the spectral analysis, the authors conclude that HIP56948 should have about 1/2 the "rocky" material formed around it than our sun, and radial velocity measurements seem to exclude giant plants in the inner planetary region. So, although they cannot be sure there are or are-not rocky planets that are terran like in the Goldilocks zone (we don't have a reliable way to figure that out yet from ground based observations), the available evidence seems to indicate that at least the prerequisites are there this would have been a reasonably good bet for the Kepler planetary survey (but it's not part of the mission). However, they are looking forward to seeing more Kepler results to verify if their spectrographic measurements technique on stars that predict the amount of rocky material is consistent with actual Kepler planetary observations** which would increase the chance that there might be Goldilocks planets circling this star and make it possible to select really good candidate star that might have rocky planets from ground based telescope spectrographic data.

      **FYI. The technique that the Kepler survey telescope uses is to actually look for photometric image of a planet transiting the star as viewed from the telescope to confirm actual planetary existance and infer it's size and distance from the star from the duration of the transit by Kepler's law (hence the name of the mission).

      Unfortunatly, although this star is similar to our Sun, this star is quite a bit younger than our sun (by about 1 billion years and our Sun is about 4.5 billion years old). As a result, we may not have a really good chance with SETI on this system (even if planets exists). It's also really hard to tell which stars come from the same stellar nursery as stars drift quite a bit after formation, but there is apparently some evidence that our sun was part of a very large nursery by dating the remanents of supernova that hit our solar system when it was probably just formed, but a billion years is a long time...

  21. Schematics by guttentag · · Score: 4, Funny

    I worry that China is broadcasting the source code for Windows Vista, and 200 years from now some alien civilization will receive it and think they're schematics for something great. They'll build it, nearly destroy themselves and then come looking for us.

    1. Re:Schematics by GiMP · · Score: 1

      To think, we invented the Descolada virus?

    2. Re:Schematics by canajin56 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think that scenario is in the EULA already, we should be covered.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    3. Re:Schematics by ignavus · · Score: 2

      I worry that China is broadcasting the source code for Windows Vista, and 200 years from now some alien civilization will receive it and think they're schematics for something great. They'll build it, nearly destroy themselves and then come looking for us.

      No problem. The aliens won't be able to activate their copies of Windows for another 200 years after they install it.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  22. Yes by confused+one · · Score: 2

    Technically, yes. That massive gravitational anchor we circle which provides all of our heat and light is a smallish star.

  23. Your are correct sir by UncleWilly · · Score: 1

    They are probably still driving Pintos

  24. Hodgkin's Law of Parallel Planetary Development by VanGarrett · · Score: 2

    Think we'll go over there and find a planet just like Earth, but Rome never fell? Or maybe they had an experiment in causing immortality go horribly wrong?

    1. Re:Hodgkin's Law of Parallel Planetary Development by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      Think we'll go over there and find a planet just like Earth, but Rome never fell? Or maybe they had an experiment in causing immortality go horribly wrong?

      zardoz?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Hodgkin's Law of Parallel Planetary Development by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 1

      Caution: You are approaching the periphery shield of Vortex Four.

  25. Hurry by MrJones · · Score: 1

    Why are we wasting time talking, just SETI it! How long could it take to find out if there is a signal??

    --
    Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
  26. Basic maths by DrYak · · Score: 4, Informative

    I like how they mention that the 23 row by 73 column interpretation is "jumbled garbage". The correct image also looks like jumbled garbage. I especially like the image of a human. How the hell is an alien supposed to figure out what that is without having seen a human before?

    The most basic possible message: counting.
    Before the human-shaped pixel art, the sequence begins with a simple count, with increasing binary numbers from 1 to 10.
    It's a pattern, which is recognizable without any cultural reference, only with some knowledge of math, which is needed to handle the radio signal any way, and this pattern is clearly not a random occurrence. Turn the data the other way around and you don't see any easily recognisable pattern at the begin, so they know it's the wrong way.

    If you want to make it clear that a message is a message and not garbage, you try to cram in something that is clearly not random, but that is as simple basic maths as possible :
    counting from 0 to some number, list of prime numbers, fibonacci sequence...

    Then you could append whatever you want. Life forms at the receiving end might not be able to understand what you mean with your picture, but at least they now they've organised the data correctly because that's the only way where the begining makes some sense in a mathematical way.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  27. Hodgkin's Law by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    If Hodgkin's Law holds, there'll be nothing for SETI to pick up yet. Adjusted for the travel time, they're just about getting steam engines.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Hodgkin's Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hodgkin's Law Lite doesn't seem that implausible for a planet that's sufficiently Earth-like. Clearly we won't be seeing a civilisation with a history the same as ours, but an ecosystem that has evolved life with similar traits to that here seems quite likely - since natural selection is supposed to select for traits that fill the existing environment - ergo similar environment, similar life forms. Though I guess drift and chance might lead to some pretty weird divergences - aren't we one asteroid impact between us mammals being dominant and the dinosaurs still being in the driving seat?

  28. Has something to do with gingerbread. by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1
    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  29. Disappointed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I thought at first they discovered Nemesis... that was more exciting for me than the possibility of extraterrestrial life.

  30. Actually by intellitech · · Score: 1

    Assuming life exists at the target, and it is intelligent enough to understand that it may not be alone in the universe and is actively attempting to answer that question, would it be incorrect to capitulate that perhaps we can expect intelligent life to maintain high power analog communications for exactly that purpose?

    --
    vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
  31. Almost certainly NOT the first intelligent life by Immerman · · Score: 2

    Actually the theory is that there were much more massive stars, and more of them, in the early universe, than form today.

    Makes sense. All the matter in the current universe was packed into a much smaller space, the initial hydrogen clouds were likely quite dense with minimal angular momentum and would have collapsed into truly stupendous stars.

    As I understand it Sol is believed to be a second-generation star that formed about halfway through the time window in which such stars would form, the chemical signature of the initial stellar cloud is the identifying characteristic of such stars (especially the C,O,N and trace heavier elements). That is the essence of the Fermi Paradox - since our star was born halfway through the window there should be no shortage of sunlike stars born billions of years before ours, and with them at least a few civilizations billions of years older than our own.(To put it in proper perspective, their life had plenty of time to reach our current level of development before Sol had even *formed*) If even one of those civilisations spread out among the stars then they, or at least descendants of their bacteria, should be EVERYWHERE, so why don't we see evidence of them?

    Personally I favor the efficiency theory - even if they never found anything better than EM radio to communicate with their receivers would rapidly become extremely efficient so transmitters wouldn't need to be as powerful, and to maximize bandwidth their signals would be compressed to the point that they're indistinguishable from random noise, we're well on our way to that point already. Add to that that any long-range transmissions almost certainly would use incredibly tight-beam transmission to maximize range per unit power, and we've got no reason to believe we could detect them unless they came knocking on our door.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  32. Heh, IF we do meet another civilization? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think they're going to look @ us like KLAATU did in the original "The Day the Earth Stood Still"...

    I say that, since I, even as a member of the human rat race does & I am certain I am not alone, especially nowadays!

    (Yes, we're pretty "odd" being a mixture of very great good, & incredibly BAD @ the same time - much as William Shakespeare stated, & because of "the system", mainly the economic one, where there is a limited, & sometimes INTENTIONALLY LIMITED ARTIFICIAL SCARCITY DRIVEN ONE, or technologies for FREE POWER being blocked by "the powers that be" too, resources - forcing us to turn into rats scurrying & battling for them - mainly so only the "few" can profit & gain power by such a setup imo!)...

    For those of you, especially those who are youngsters, who haven't seen it? Start here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThEzwyuSxgA&feature=related

    My fav. part, & the BEST part of the film (that leads me to the above conclusion on my part because of HOW WE ARE) is @ position 4.22 onwards on the youtube player...

    Speaks worlds!

    Yes - especially if you take the words of MegaDeth to heart in "Symphony of Destruction" (you take a mortal man, & put him in control) -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfpgpf6QVnI&ob=av2n because that's what we ALWAYS manage to do, unfortunately... makes us out to be BUNGLING IDIOTS that once we get a "taste of power", it takes over any of us.

    (The whole film's up there, you can find it via that part there).

    APK

    P.S.=> It's a classic that makes you *THINK*, & the only thing that's going to change things, is starting with yourself (educate people, & then learn to improve things from it, by gaining the ability to think inductively to improve things around yourself & others)... apk

  33. Eew! Carbon-based life! by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

    They might feel the urge to squish us the same way we squish a bug. Our existence might offend their sensibilities. Who says extraterrestrial intelligence has to be rational. We're not.