Advertisement
By Seth Shostak
SETI Institute
posted: 18 January 2007
06:38 am ET
“At what point would you abandon the search?”
That’s a question I get relatively frequently from folks who think that SETI may be a quixotic quest, as futile as searching for the Seven Cities of Gold. After all, modern efforts to find signals from extraterrestrial transmitters are now in their fifth decade. Could it be that those of us who still hope to tune in other worlds may be missing some writing on the wall? Some dead-obvious, chiseled text with a simple, if disappointing message: “There are no aliens”?
The question seems fair, since SETI’s obvious analogs–the historical voyages of discovery made in the centuries following the Renaissance–were completed in considerably less time than SETI has been beating the cosmic bushes. Columbus spent five weeks finding North America (and he wasn’t even looking). Captain Cook, a true paragon of explorers, and a man who mapped places that Europeans didn’t even know were places, never mounted an expedition that lasted more than three years.
But those analogs are false. The South Pacific, for all its watery wastes, is comprehensible in size. Even Cook’s unimpressive Whitby collier, powered by sailcloth, could cross the Pacific in a matter of months, come about, and cross again in a different direction. His quarry, the islands peppering the ocean like coins scattered onto a living room carpet, signaled their presence by clots of clouds even when the islands themselves were below the horizon.
The SETI wilderness is incomparably larger, obviously, and its quarry is cryptic. Even if there are ten thousand transmitting societies nestled in the arms of the Milky Way, we might need to search millions of star systems before we find one. The actual number of star systems that radio SETI experiments have carefully examined is fewer than a thousand.
It’s a simple truth, although one not universally acknowledged, that SETI is still in its early stages. Consequently, many of its practitioners will tell you that this is a multigenerational experiment, akin to building cathedrals in medieval Europe. In other words, a lot of SETI scientists will answer the question that began this article by saying “not in my lifetime, nor in that of my children or grandchildren.”
Fighting words, but could they be hyperbolic? To begin with, SETI experiments will have examined millions of star systems within a generation. And within two, we could carefully check every star in the Galaxy. The SETI ship has a lot of ocean to cover, but thanks to new technologies, it’s picking up speed. So clearly, if we haven’t found something by mid-century or so, it will be hard to argue that it’s still “early stages.”
And frankly, it’s conceivable that SETI’s basic assumptions might be proven wrong. Imagine that the new space-based telescopes (COROT and Kepler) currently being deployed to hunt for Earth-size planets around other stars come up empty. That would be a premium-grade bummer. But even if (as widely expected) they do discover rocky worlds, it’s possible that a decade or so down the line, their telescopic successors–atmosphere-sniffing instruments such as the Terrestrial Planet Finder–might fail to find any extrasolar worlds on which life has taken hold.
Spacecraft of the future might return to us the news that neither Mars, Europa, nor any of the other orbs of the solar system with liquid water have ever produced a microbe. If these are headlines of the future–if the local cosmic neighborhood turns out to be as sterile as prime-time television–then that would certainly put me on the defensive.
But the fact is that none of this incites me to break out the worry beads. Not yet. The various factors in the well-known Drake Equation, which is often used to estimate the chances of SETI success, have–at least until now–become more encouraging with time, not less. The more we learn about the universe, the more it seems disposed to house worlds with life. It didn’t have to be that way.
Somewhat more disquieting is the possibility that our approach is wrong. SETI today is overwhelmingly a search for narrow-band electromagnetic transmissions, or in fewer syllables, a hunt for beamed radio or light. We search with straightforward telescopic techniques, but it’s possible that alien broadcasts could be encoded in ways that we’re not set up to find. I’m not talking about how they construct their messages–or whether they’re broadcasting in Standard American English or a lilting Klingon dialect–but the technical scheme they use. For instance, Walt Simmons at the University of Hawaii has suggested that garrulous aliens might wield two widely separated transmitters and use quantum mechanical effects to encode their messages. The advantage would be that if we opened this type of alien mail, it would be impossible to tell from which direction it came, thereby protecting the anonymity of the sender. This sort of approach–still somewhat beyond our technical abilities–might make our present receiving schemes seem naïve.
In addition, there’s always the chance that the discovery of new physics will reveal some communication mode that’s either faster than light and radio, or requires less energy to use. This doesn’t seem likely, but science is all about surprises.
Indeed, my personal feeling is that if SETI hasn’t turned up something by the second half of this century, we should reconsider our search strategy, rather than assume that we’ve failed because there is nothing–or no one–to find. Would I ever conclude that we’ve searched enough? Would I ever truly give up on SETI’s bedrock premise, and tell myself that the extraterrestrials simply aren’t out there? Not likely. That would be to assume that we’ve learned all there is to know about our universe, a stance that is contrary to the spirit of explorers and scientists alike. We might yearn, or even need to believe that we are special, but to conclude that Homo sapiens is the best the cosmos has to offer is egregious self-adulation.
SETI Institute
posted: 18 January 2007
06:38 am ET
“At what point would you abandon the search?”
That’s a question I get relatively frequently from folks who think that SETI may be a quixotic quest, as futile as searching for the Seven Cities of Gold. After all, modern efforts to find signals from extraterrestrial transmitters are now in their fifth decade. Could it be that those of us who still hope to tune in other worlds may be missing some writing on the wall? Some dead-obvious, chiseled text with a simple, if disappointing message: “There are no aliens”?
The question seems fair, since SETI’s obvious analogs–the historical voyages of discovery made in the centuries following the Renaissance–were completed in considerably less time than SETI has been beating the cosmic bushes. Columbus spent five weeks finding North America (and he wasn’t even looking). Captain Cook, a true paragon of explorers, and a man who mapped places that Europeans didn’t even know were places, never mounted an expedition that lasted more than three years.
But those analogs are false. The South Pacific, for all its watery wastes, is comprehensible in size. Even Cook’s unimpressive Whitby collier, powered by sailcloth, could cross the Pacific in a matter of months, come about, and cross again in a different direction. His quarry, the islands peppering the ocean like coins scattered onto a living room carpet, signaled their presence by clots of clouds even when the islands themselves were below the horizon.
The SETI wilderness is incomparably larger, obviously, and its quarry is cryptic. Even if there are ten thousand transmitting societies nestled in the arms of the Milky Way, we might need to search millions of star systems before we find one. The actual number of star systems that radio SETI experiments have carefully examined is fewer than a thousand.
It’s a simple truth, although one not universally acknowledged, that SETI is still in its early stages. Consequently, many of its practitioners will tell you that this is a multigenerational experiment, akin to building cathedrals in medieval Europe. In other words, a lot of SETI scientists will answer the question that began this article by saying “not in my lifetime, nor in that of my children or grandchildren.”
Fighting words, but could they be hyperbolic? To begin with, SETI experiments will have examined millions of star systems within a generation. And within two, we could carefully check every star in the Galaxy. The SETI ship has a lot of ocean to cover, but thanks to new technologies, it’s picking up speed. So clearly, if we haven’t found something by mid-century or so, it will be hard to argue that it’s still “early stages.”
And frankly, it’s conceivable that SETI’s basic assumptions might be proven wrong. Imagine that the new space-based telescopes (COROT and Kepler) currently being deployed to hunt for Earth-size planets around other stars come up empty. That would be a premium-grade bummer. But even if (as widely expected) they do discover rocky worlds, it’s possible that a decade or so down the line, their telescopic successors–atmosphere-sniffing instruments such as the Terrestrial Planet Finder–might fail to find any extrasolar worlds on which life has taken hold.
Spacecraft of the future might return to us the news that neither Mars, Europa, nor any of the other orbs of the solar system with liquid water have ever produced a microbe. If these are headlines of the future–if the local cosmic neighborhood turns out to be as sterile as prime-time television–then that would certainly put me on the defensive.
But the fact is that none of this incites me to break out the worry beads. Not yet. The various factors in the well-known Drake Equation, which is often used to estimate the chances of SETI success, have–at least until now–become more encouraging with time, not less. The more we learn about the universe, the more it seems disposed to house worlds with life. It didn’t have to be that way.
Somewhat more disquieting is the possibility that our approach is wrong. SETI today is overwhelmingly a search for narrow-band electromagnetic transmissions, or in fewer syllables, a hunt for beamed radio or light. We search with straightforward telescopic techniques, but it’s possible that alien broadcasts could be encoded in ways that we’re not set up to find. I’m not talking about how they construct their messages–or whether they’re broadcasting in Standard American English or a lilting Klingon dialect–but the technical scheme they use. For instance, Walt Simmons at the University of Hawaii has suggested that garrulous aliens might wield two widely separated transmitters and use quantum mechanical effects to encode their messages. The advantage would be that if we opened this type of alien mail, it would be impossible to tell from which direction it came, thereby protecting the anonymity of the sender. This sort of approach–still somewhat beyond our technical abilities–might make our present receiving schemes seem naïve.
In addition, there’s always the chance that the discovery of new physics will reveal some communication mode that’s either faster than light and radio, or requires less energy to use. This doesn’t seem likely, but science is all about surprises.
Indeed, my personal feeling is that if SETI hasn’t turned up something by the second half of this century, we should reconsider our search strategy, rather than assume that we’ve failed because there is nothing–or no one–to find. Would I ever conclude that we’ve searched enough? Would I ever truly give up on SETI’s bedrock premise, and tell myself that the extraterrestrials simply aren’t out there? Not likely. That would be to assume that we’ve learned all there is to know about our universe, a stance that is contrary to the spirit of explorers and scientists alike. We might yearn, or even need to believe that we are special, but to conclude that Homo sapiens is the best the cosmos has to offer is egregious self-adulation.
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: When Does SETI Throw in the Towel?
Thu, January 18, 2007 - 2:20 PMOnce again, "Go Seth!".
Admittedly, it's really frustrating to be at the "beginning" of true space exploration. As Shostak points out, we've got a lot of space to cover, and aren't even totally sure what we should be looking for. But to abandon the search altogether is simply ridiculous. If anything, we should expand our search to include more big time telescopes, many space based, pointed in more directions and listening on a myriad of different frequencies.
Oh, that's right. I forgot. No money. We have terrorists that need to be brought to justice... -
-
Re: When Does SETI Throw in the Towel?
Thu, January 18, 2007 - 10:11 PMThe bigger the toys the more people want instant gratification. How long did manking search to find our first fossil ancestor? How long have we studied the oceans and we still know only about 1% of what is down there. Yet scanning the verse for less than 40 years and maybe only 10 with decent tools and we are ready to throw in the towel and say there is nothing out there.
-
-
Re: When Does SETI Throw in the Towel?
Fri, January 19, 2007 - 6:38 AMSeth Shostak said:
>“At what point would you abandon the search?” <
I would never give up searching, because by the nature of the problem, failing to find intelligent life in one place does not mean that it cannot exist in another place.
>Could it be that those of us who still hope to tune in other worlds may be missing some writing on the wall? Some dead-obvious, chiseled text with a simple, if disappointing message: “There are no aliens”? <
Who would write such a text? Certainly, its very existence would prove it to be mendacious :)
I will also point out that, our current search techniques are only geared to finding _technologically advanced_ aliens -- ones with engineering attainments at least equal to that of Earth c. 1900. But on the Earth itself, there are at least five nonhuman sapient species (chimps, bonobos, gorillas, orangs, and African gray parrots) and may be dozens more; none of the nonhuman sapients of Earth have progressed beyond a very early Paleolithic technology. It may well be that technology is much harder than mere intelligence.
Consider this: our own ancestors, including probably many kinds of extinct great ape, and certainly several species of extinct humans, were sapient. But of all these species and subspecies, only _homo sapiens sapiens_ progressed beyond the Paleolithic. We had _no_ noticable toolkit for some ten million years; only a very basic one for some million years; and only developed complex tools within the last few hundred thousand years. Our own subspecies is only about a hundred thousand years old.
We had to (1) make the Great Cultural Leap Forward (probably the appearance of fully syntactical language with the final evolution of the Broca's area of our brains) around 50-75 thousand years BC; discover agriculture (around 8000 BC), usable metals (around 4000 BC), writing (around 3000 BC) philosophy (around 750 BC), science (around AD 1500) and finally usable electricity (around AD 1750) (*) before we were firmly on the road that would lead to radio (around AD 1900). Radio is the key discovery here because it was what enables us to produce signals easily detectible across interstellar distances by our current technologies.
Note that not only would our current technologies not give us a clue as to the existence of a hundred thousand lowland gorilla equivalents if they dwelt on Epsilon Eridani III, it would not even enable us to detect a "Roman Empire" at such a distance. The situation will imrpove within 50 or so years when space-based long-baseline virtual telescopy lets us image Terrestrial planets circling the nearer stars, because we'll be able to analyze their atmospheres with spectrography, but even then it would be difficult to tell the effects of volcanic from industrial pollution.
There are about as many galaxies in the observable Universe as there are individuals currently living on the Earth, and each galaxy contains stars in the hundreds of millions, each of which may well be orbited by several, perhaps dozens of planets (there are eight planets and dozens of large planetoids in our own Solar System). We can't really exclude the ones which aren't very similar to Earth: our own system contains one definite and several possible life-bearing worlds, even limiting it to biochemistries similar to our own. When you're talking about quintillions of worlds, the search task is clearly stupendous!
We _can_ by now state that there are probably no civilizations at a c. 1900 or greater level of technological progress (adjusting for the lightspeed lag) within, say, 50-100 LY of the Solar System. Though there is still time for us to be surprised: some advanced civilization might have followed a rather different technological path than our own, and _not_ developed broadcast radio.
But this bubble of near Solar interstellar space is tiny by the standards of a Galaxy some 90,000 LY in diameter, let alone by that of an observable Universe over 10 billion LY in radius (though for evolutionary reasons, we probably "only" need to consider the region within about a few billion LY of our own Galaxy, since older regions _probably_ haven't had the time to develop sapient life).
Basically, when it comes to SETI, I agree with you that 50 years is not a very long time for such an endeavor -- the search has only begun.
- Jordan
(*) Though there was an abortive discovery of electricty in Babylonian times, as part of the earliest alchemical tradition. -
-
Re: When Does SETI Throw in the Towel?
Tue, January 23, 2007 - 4:02 PMAll the above thread is super groovy and well thought out... but the simply posed question begs an equally simple answer:
When we get a response is when we quit looking.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: When Does SETI Throw in the Towel?
Tue, January 23, 2007 - 10:42 PMIt seems to me that the search was propelled by a motive to conquer space, with the dangerous assumption that human beings are more powerful than any other life form in the universe. Was the consequence of contact with another living planet carefully thought out? If the answer is no, maybe we could stop the search for a while and ask ourselves, why are we really doing this. -
-
Re: When Does SETI Throw in the Towel?
Wed, January 24, 2007 - 7:35 AMConquer space? No, I don't think that's the motive at all. Since we've only got to the moon so far and haven't even got humans to Mars yet, methinx conquering space is a long way off indeed. The motive is quite passive, really. Simply to see if we are indeed alone in this universe, or if there are other civilizations out there who also feel the loneliness that we do, the need for communication.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The new Manifest Destiny is to spread out to the stars, as admittedly flawed as we are. If we wait until we get it perfect down here on Earth, we will never begin the journey. -
-
Re: When Does SETI Throw in the Towel?
Wed, January 24, 2007 - 10:34 AMThere is a hell of a lot of space out there before I think we would encounter any physical presence Representatives of another civilization, to "compete" with...
-
-