SETI is silly

It may be that much more advanced beings are watching us & "laughing their asses off" at our science. IF I were to find such is true, I would yet know that it is the right thing to do our best to find out what we can & do what we can. IF SETI never finds evidence of some life out there, it will continue to be so easy for some to dismiss it. IF SETI does find evidence, suddenly it will be proven to have been worthwhile. And either way it happens will be a result of chance circumstance. If we stop SETI, we will probably never know what might have been.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Russ Watters: So far no Poster has addressed the issues described in my Post #1 paraphrased as follows

BTW: Our Arecibo message lasted only 3 minutes. Even if directed precisely at an ET culture, the chance of its being detected seems like an excellent approximation to zero.

The ET receivers would have to be aligned precisely along the direction of the signal & be turned on for exactly the correct 3 minute period. Similarly for our SETI receivers if some ET culture sends an Arecibo-like signal.

For those who do not grok a directional error of 1/3600 degree, consider a pie cut into 3600*360 slices. One such slice indicates an error of 1/3600 degree.

If the nearest ET is in some solar system farther away than Proxima Centauri, the chance of the signal being directed toward us is an even better approximation to zero.

Signal strength is meaningless if the signal is not sent in the correct direction. However, I would still be interested in the signal strength required by a transmitter on Proxima Centauri to be strong enough to be detected by a receiver on Earth.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The point is it's not zero. And any potential discovery, would be Earth shattering and Humanity changing to say the least.
But what I want to know, is what is your agenda, pushing this "SETI is üseless" concept so passionately, and so often, and in such derisive terms as you have used now and in the past.
What is driving you?
I mean SETI will continue. You are not going to destabilize their excellent research and science, so why so much passion, pushing such a fruitless agenda?
.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Polly want a cracker?

You're simply parroting this lie of yours over and over again and you know it and we know it and you know we know it and you know it. So why are you even bothering to keep repeating the lie?

We all know you know we know you are aware that the Arecibo message existed and demonstrates the capability to do what you claim is impossible. Parrotting the lie/contradiction that we can't do it while acknowledging that we can do it and utterly ignoring the clear explantions of what is wrong with your logic isn't taking you anywhere useful. It's just a a one-way ticket to planet crackpot.

 

From Paddoby Post #23

It amuses me to tease believers in the SETI project & I really think they are wasting funding & intellectual resources on a project with little or no hope for success.

Furthermore, you & others often refer to in Posts to other Threads, reminding me of that Thread.

 

Let's sum up:

1. You claim that earthbound broadcasts can't be detected even as far as Mars due to the inverse square law.
2. You acknowledge the existence of the Arecebo message, which has a signal strength strong enough to be detected over many light-years.
3. Claiming #1 while acknowledging #2 is lying/trolling because they obviously contradict each other.

 

Translation: you admit you are just trolling here.

 

Aliens or Not it doesn't matter, the principle point here is that it maintains people having an interest in technologies and methods that otherwise would just go the way of... (no pun intended) the Dinosaur.

While indeed we might be alone or if we aren't alone there might be significant differences in communication methods through technology, there is potentially a number of directions in regards to research that otherwise wouldn't be conducted. It might be seen as wasteful research if you tally it against something like looking for the cure to a particular non-curable ailment, but its important in other areas. For instance the recent increase in awareness of rogue meteors (Ones on trajectory with Earth), while they aren't broadcasting signals into the universe only those that spend their time scanning the skies will likely spot them, SETI could quite easily aid in detecting them while continuing their search for signals.

 

Russ Watters: From your Post #26

You surprise me: I expected you to have more knowledge than indicated by the above.

Your Post indicates that you do not understand the difference between ordinary TV/radio broadcasts (subject to an inverse square law) & directed signals such as the Arecibo Message.

Did you really think before you made your Post #26?

BTW: While I acknowledge that Arecibo-like signals could theoretically be detected over a distance of light years, there is still the problem of their being directed precisely enough to hit the receivers.

Note that the Arecibo equipment was designed to observe astronomical phenomena. It was never intended for the sending of signals to an ET culture.

To the best of my knowledge, the original 3-minute signal was sent only once as a ceremonial gesture when the equipment was first ready for use.

 

What was your assumption on the diameter of the directed signal beam after it had traveled 4.2 light years?

 

Just as I thought. By extension, your weird taste for amusements, also takes in the "questionable calcs and figures" and general argument against SETI that you have dished up.
And why the fact that people supporting a deserved concept such as SETI, should drive you to such dishonesty, still remains somewhat unclear.

 

If extraterrestrials have space faring ships and are not still living in the equivalent of humanities ages and are more advanced then humanity then they would need a faster then currently known communication method,id image for s.o.s reasons..

 

My knowledge is fine: your lies are the problem here.

Thus rendering your claim that SETI's success is impossible to be a known lie. Yes, we all are on the same page and have been for the dozens of times you've made the known lie claim.

For clarity, sometimes you alter the lie slightly to say that SETI is intended only to detect ambient/normal emissions (as if the fact that Arecibo is capable of interstellar communication is irrelevant to your claim that interstellar communication is impossible

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

) But you've seen the FAQ quoted a number of times and you know that's not true (not that a person with a logical mind requires reading the faq to know that they'd be ok with detecting anything, whether a normal transmission or intended communication). So that version of your nonsense is also obviously a lie.

I can't quite call that a lie - more like intentional ignorance. As I've said a number of times -- and other people have pointed out the flaw as well -- I'm quite willing to walk you through the calculation of pointing accuracy and how it relates to signal intensity. All you have to do is actually engage me/show interest and I'll do it.

That lie is a lie of intentional oversimplification, implying that such a practical difference actually exists.

 

So let's sum-up again:

1. You are aware that Arecibo is capable of interstellar communication.
2. You nevertheless claim that interstellar communication is impossible.

Lies are almost irrelevant when everyone is clear about the lie -- this really is more specifically just trolling.

 

There motivation is largely covered by the name of the project. They are searching for extraterrestrial intelligence. Does that lack sufficient interest to qualify as a sound motivation?

If I were one of the prime SETI investigators I think there would be enough her to sue you for libel (or is it slander?).

Excuse me, but where have you been for the last five decades? Many Mars probes - at least twenty - have routinely communicated back to the Earth.

 

Sorry, I haven't been following this thread very closely, so I hope the following remark is pertinent. Excuse my butting in if it is not.

Perhaps your type II and III (higher civilizations, right?) are very much aware of us, and just have no interest in mixing with 'primitives' such as our humble selves. When Chinese civilization was at its height ( or one or more of its historical peaks) they knew very well that there were pale-skinned, round-eyed folk raising pigs and brewing cider and fighting each other like street gangs in the faraway forests on the faraway, easily overlooked western peninsula of Eurasia (Europe), and it just didn't occur to them to bother with them. What? Set up trade agreements with savage woodsmen five and six thousand miles away? What would be the point? They had pigs, firewood and acorns of their own if they required such.

Even the denizens of - for what the Europeans is- the "Near East" had a real WTF? moment when unwashed and iron-clad ginger-haired 'Crusaders' fell upon Jerusalem for the first time. There they were busying themselves with algebra, optics and enjoying translations of Aristotle when some Eurotrash arrived out of nowhere (i.e. those far northern semi-mythical, half-remembered, frozen forests) and decided to 'liberate' their Holy City. What!? Whose Holy City?

It's like the entry for Earth in The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The guide is a thick tome but the galaxy is a big place, and only what is essential and of general interest to 'civilized' readers can be discussed. So the entry for our obscure, jerkwater world consists of a single word: harmless.

At he close of Douglas Adams five-book 'trilogy', the newer edition of the guide amends it entry for Earth to: mostly harmless.

 

Let us review some Posts made here.

From Russ Watters Post #26

Due to the above, I made Post #29

BTW: While I acknowledge that Arecibo-like signals could theoretically be detected over a distance of light years, there is still the problem of their being directed precisely enough to hit the receivers.

I repeat a previous claim: You do not seem to understand the difference between ordinary TV/radio broadcasts & directed signals like the Arecibo Message.

The ordinary TV/radio broadcasts are subject to inverse square law degradation, while a directed signal like the Arecibo Message is not subject to inverse square law degradation.

Origin: In Post #30 you asked

I assumed that it was a precisely directed signal rather than a cone-shaped signal, which would be subject to inverse square law degradation. I do not know if such a directed signal is possible.

Russ: From your Post #33 Your quoted my remark

Your comment was

I wonder if a moderator will notice your accusation. Note the following from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message

You accuse me of lying & do not seem to know much about the intent of Arecibo Message.

The above supports my claim & refutes your accusation of my lying.

I deny the allegation & defy the allegator !!

 

well, it's obvious to me why you received a warning.
your intentions are very clear.(from your own words)

 

It is not possible. I thought that might be your assumption. There will always be a spread in a directed signal even a laser (the diameter of a typical laser "spot" at just 1 mile is ~4 ft.)
For a directed radio wave the spread is much more.

So you will have to rethink you claim of the difficulty of 'hitting' a planet with a signal.