If we receive a signal from deep space, what do you think it is most likely to be?

[bsalis]

Probably advertising.

[FanaticalFighter]

"People of Earth, your attention, please. This is Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz of the Galactic Hyperspace Planning Council. As you will no doubt be aware, the plans for development of the outlying regions of the Galaxy require the building of a hyperspatial express route through your star system. And regrettably, your planet is one of those scheduled for demolition. The process will take slightly less than two of your Earth minutes. Thank you."

No one got this? C'mon, you guys need to read more.

I think it'll just be complete nonsense.I mean, how do we even know what they meant?

[Lohan2008]

I was reading an article about Seti and it was saying that sending out numerous probes like Voyager may be more productive over a long time, mainly because if you recieve a signal it maynot be able to be picked up again, as well the (probe) construction will tell alot about the culture that sent it.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Lohan2008

[Derpy_Llama_]

"People of Earth, your attention, please. This is Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz of the Galactic Hyperspace Planning Council. As you will no doubt be aware, the plans for development of the outlying regions of the Galaxy require the building of a hyperspatial express route through your star system. And regrettably, your planet is one of those scheduled for demolition. The process will take slightly less than two of your Earth minutes. Thank you."

Awwww yeah, hitchhikers guide to the galaxy.

[John Crichton]

Seems like people agree all we'll get is nonsense

[NQMT]

I think it'll be a formal letter of complaint, reading: Stop sending us Jazz!!!

[Albert VDS]

Probably laser pulses, not radio waves, as radio waves from anything but giant radiotelescopes become too scattered after only a few lightyears.

And most likely we won't be able to make sense of it.

Lasers, unlike popular believe would suggest, don't stay in a straight line. Yes it has a straight beam, and over "short" distances it it "stays" that way.

But if you look at it's beam at larger distances you will notice that it will spread out. It's because of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, no sub atomic particle(in this case a photon) can have a speed of zero in any direction.

As for the poll:

Friend request - Possible. We've sent one before, so why wouldn't they do it.

Death threat - Highly unlikely, considering the energy, time and resources that you would need to put in to it just to destroy some species you don't know anything about.

Computer virus - Immpossible, unless you live in the universe of Independence Day. A Windows virus isn't compatible with (let's say something random) a Commodore 64.

Copy of something we sent - Possible, if they sent it to tell us "message received".

Unintentionally sent signal, like TV - Possible, we do this all the time.

Prime numbers - Possible, if they send it in a countable way.

Unintelligible block of nonsense - Possible, as it might be send in a way we don't understand/can't decode in either language or transition.

Call for help - Unlikely, though you could argue that this message isn't meant for us, but someone closer to them.

Other neutral - See Friend request

Other threat - See Death treat

[ZedNova]

Another possible message:

We are Borg. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. Resistance is futile.

[PB666]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/alien-transit-systems-may-be-a-giveaway-in-the-search-for-et/?WT.mc_id=SA_DD_20150824

This fellow thinks they will be pumping out MW radiation to drive solar sails at the rate of 1/10 th the rate of Earths total electrical output.

[User Unrelated]

This book

http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm

Has a pretty neat way of dealing with first-contact. I won't spoil anything for those who want to read it.

It's an excellent read, too. I highly recommend it.

Search the page for the text "I was the only pure spectator." if you want to skip straight to the communication bits.

Edited August 25, 2015 by User Unrelated

[Ralathon]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/alien-transit-systems-may-be-a-giveaway-in-the-search-for-et/?WT.mc_id=SA_DD_20150824

This fellow thinks they will be pumping out MW radiation to drive solar sails at the rate of 1/10 th the rate of Earths total electrical output.

However, I do agree with you. If we pick up some signal it's probably something unintentional, we haven't been around long enough to be particularly noticable. Also, if we can detect it from such huge distances it has to be a really powerful energy source. So some kind of advanced drive system or a long distance radio bounce would be very likely sources. The radio bounces that we use to measure the planets in the solar system should be detectable for dozens of lightyears. If they do the same trick with asteroids and exoplanets they should be visible through much of the galaxy.

[More Boosters]

http://s20.postimg.org/ckt5bsdx9/Thread_Necromancy_3038.jpg

However, I do agree with you. If we pick up some signal it's probably something unintentional, we haven't been around long enough to be particularly noticable. Also, if we can detect it from such huge distances it has to be a really powerful energy source. So some kind of advanced drive system or a long distance radio bounce would be very likely sources. The radio bounces that we use to measure the planets in the solar system should be detectable for dozens of lightyears. If they do the same trick with asteroids and exoplanets they should be visible through much of the galaxy.

So WHAT?

The guy clearly had something to add to the thread.

There existed a thread on something he wanted to talk about.

So let him talk about it.

And don't post cliched pictures that come across as just being rude.

[PB666]

http://s20.postimg.org/ckt5bsdx9/Thread_Necromancy_3038.jpg

However, I do agree with you. If we pick up some signal it's probably something unintentional, we haven't been around long enough to be particularly noticable. Also, if we can detect it from such huge distances it has to be a really powerful energy source. So some kind of advanced drive system or a long distance radio bounce would be very likely sources. The radio bounces that we use to measure the planets in the solar system should be detectable for dozens of lightyears. If they do the same trick with asteroids and exoplanets they should be visible through much of the galaxy.

Trying to limit the number of threads so I searched for an old threat to drop it into, its got nostalgia.

Yeah, but think about the distances we are detecting earth like planets, 100s of ly away. You are going to have to have a signal 1000 fold stronger. These sail trails are not going to be going every dierction, The theta they might be detected would be small and may be rotating, so it might be transiently detected, and it wouldn't be detected long. The other

thing if you think someone might be listening in, you might spread the frequency out and make it look like noise or a natural source of RF radiation.

[windows_x_seven]

Either it's a signal bouncing back at us, or it's a Duna-TV signal that wasn't even supposed to get here.

[Aethon]

Any signal received from an extra terrestrial intelligence will likely* be complete gibberish.

The search routines used by SETI average signal over time, to separate signal from noise. The familiar Wow signal is an example. 6EQUJ5, circled on the printout is not a message sent by ET. It is a human measure of the intensity of the signal vs noise, over time. The signals' information content was not recorded, just the intensity. If a signal were persistent, then it will be recorded- but lets take a look at the type of signals we send.

The most powerful 'messages' we send into space are our narrow band planetary defense RADARs, which our technology could detect out to a distance of a few hundreds of light years, but there is zero information encoded in them. They contain nothing that can be decoded or considered a message. Our TV signals which are much less powerful, do contain information, but I'm willing to bet no one who ever reads this post could decode the picture or sound from an old I Love Lucy broadcast.

Even further, lets consider an ancient Greek language called Linear A. It was created by human beings with which we share a genome, and yet we have not been able to decode it. Genus Homo, shares about 40% of our genome with the lowly potato, not well known as much of a conversationalist. In fact we have yet to decode a single message from the potato, one of our fellow astronauts here on spaceship Earth. So imagine the difficulty in trying to decode a message from an advanced technological society that is much less similar to us than we are to a potato.

However if the signal does come in, decoded or not, we will learn something of immense value. That we are not alone in the universe, and there is a chance that civilizations can survive their technological infancies, as well as any other 'Great Filters' that intelligent societies face in a vast, largely unexplored cosmos.

* The burden is on the sender to devise a message that is easily understood. If the purpose of the signal is to communicate information to us, I'm willing to entertain the notion that the signal may be easily decoded by anyone able to build a radio receiver, perhaps even coming to us in the perfect kings English, or Mandarin Chinese.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Aethon

[lajoswinkler]

Unintentional signals like our TV and radio - never. After approximately one lightyear they are so weak that it's physically impossible to distinguish them from the background EM noise.

Contrary to the popular myth, someone out there is certainly not watching our stupid shows and listening to songs.

Powerful directional signals, they can be received, but they are fairly rare.

[windows_x_seven]

Any signal received from an extra terrestrial intelligence will be likely* be complete gibberish.

Hmm... what about a signal in binary, then?

2 different characters in a certain sequence and it's done. Aliens.

Edited August 26, 2015 by windows_x_seven

[Aethon]

impossible to distinguish them from the background EM noise.

.

Lajos and I have debated this point for years in private chat and I'm glad to see his opinion changing somewhat. While I'd love to argue with him (I do every day) he's wrong .

Anyone who lives around a star, has at their disposal a telescope of immense proportions- the gravitational lens of their sun, with which it would be possible to detect our streetlights from a distance of hundreds of light years.

SETI panel Seth Shostak and Frank Drake discuss this very question :https://youtu.be/0bWK5ES3lTE?t=4220

It's only been 100 years since Marconi, and it may have been 100,000 years since their version of Marconi, so I'm not sure human technology should be used as a yard stick by which to judge what is and isn't possible in the universe.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Aethon

[PB666]

Unintentional signals like our TV and radio - never. After approximately one lightyear they are so weak that it's physically impossible to distinguish them from the background EM noise.

Contrary to the popular myth, someone out there is certainly not watching our stupid shows and listening to songs.

Powerful directional signals, they can be received, but they are fairly rare.

They are too busy evedropping on our cell phone messages, reading our face-book pages and replying to twitter as anonymous101.

[rtxoff]

Lajos and I have debated this point for years in private chat and I'm glad to see his opinion changing somewhat. While I'd love to argue with him (I do every day) he's wrong .

Anyone who lives around a star, has at their disposal a telescope of immense proportions- the gravitational lens of their sun, with which it would be possible to detect our streetlights from a distance of hundreds of light years.

SETI panel Seth Shostak and Frank Drake discuss this very question :https://youtu.be/0bWK5ES3lTE?t=4220

It's only been 100 years since Marconi, and it may have been 100,000 years since their version of Marconi, so I'm not sure human technology should be used as a yard stick by which to judge what is and isn't possible in the universe.

There is no reason to assume that there might be someone out there overtrumping our little puny existence in this universe. But there is every reason to assume that they will be limited the same way by the physical laws we are limited to. So basically a civ that might be able to do something you say will have to overcome the same hurdles we have. Some of that hurdles are: reaching a certain technological level without nuking themselves to oblivion, overcome sociopolitical problems so that the whole planet can use its resources for a common goal, survive eventual natural catastrophes like asteroids and gamma ray bursts.

I'm pretty sure there is life out there but i'm also pretty sure we don't have to fear them.

[Hagen von Tronje]

I think we never will receive such a signal, not because there's not life out there but because heavy hitters like cosmic distances, the speed of light, and the vast well of time, will prevent our paths from ever crossing.

If we did though, I have to think it would be a directed signal carrying a message that is intended to be recognizable, like primes, though whether or not we would recognize it anyway is another matter, as from what I've read we (humans) weren't even that good at figuring out how to read our own messages intended for such contact. I think this because incidental dispersion of signal becomes so weak over interstellar distances that I doubt it would reach anyone else out there in a condition fit to read at all, which leaves only the outside chance of picking up a signal that was meant to be picked up, possibly without knowing we were here but just as one of millions of such signals an exploratory race not unlike ourselves sent out in the hopes one would find a listener.

From our perspective though it may look like an unintelligible block of nonsense. Even aside from the question of our ability to decode the signal, it's entirely possible that cosmically speaking, we are morons. The aliens in question could very well have a bar for intelligence set somewhere above "grasps prime numbers" and send a message directed at the kind of life they'd like to encounter.

[Aethon]

.

I'm pretty sure there is life out there but i'm also pretty sure we don't have to fear them.

Let's hope so.

However, I contend that the smartest animals here on Earth ( our only data point ) are predators (gpisic and I have discussed this extensively in Steam chat as well, so I know he debates the idea that humans are predators. I say : Eyes in the front of the head. He says : Our eye placement is for jumping from tree to tree.). The predator prey relationship increases the intelligence of both. I think we are most likely to meet a fellow predator who clawed it's way to the top of a far off food chain.

Now whether predatory aggression designed to facilitate f'ing and fighting on a primitive grassland is a survivable trait remains a mystery, which is precisely why an intelligent signal from 'the other' is so important for us to find. Much of our territorial aggression has faded away, and will probably continue to do so. Human males are one of the few animals that can peacefully(?) exist in large groups (try putting 40 male animals of most any other species in a room together for a few days and see what happens).

Further, technology itself can be seen as aggressive. It treats nature as an enemy and attempts to force the chaos of the environment into unnatural forms, a rebellion against the natural order. To flourish in a hostile environment, intelligence needs powerful (dangerous) tools and large empires. I contend it is folly for a young technology to shout blindly into a jungle that holds unknown hazards.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Aethon

[Mr Shifty]

Human males are one of the few animals that can peacefully(?) exist in large groups (try putting 40 male animals of most any other species in a room together for a few days and see what happens).

Wut? The first rule of fight club is...

Your comment is pretty mammal specific, though even with mammals, males often form bachelor herds: deer, elephants, lions, dolphins, etc.

Further, technology itself can be seen as aggressive. It treats nature as an enemy and attempts to force the chaos of the environment into unnatural forms, a rebellion against the natural order. To flourish in a hostile environment, intelligence needs powerful (dangerous) tools and large empires. I contend it is folly for a young technology to shout blindly into a jungle that holds unknown hazards.

There's no such thing as a 'natural order.' The division between 'technology' and 'nature' is, while often a useful generalization, ultimately false. Nature -- that is the energy-rich environment that characterizes localities that might support life -- is actually inherently non-chaotic. Life itself is a huge entropy sink, many orders of magnitude greater than any tools humans (or other animals) have developed. And I'm not sure how you surmise that intelligence needs powerful tools and large empires; your following statement seems to undermine this notion.

[Aethon]

Your comment is pretty mammal specific

I think I'm safe in saying that the dominant animals on Earth (the most likely to be detected by others 'out there') are mammals.

There's no such thing as a 'natural order.

I'm talking about the distinction between life and not life, although if you ask a thermodynamicists about that they'll say it's hard to make a distinction between the two.

And I'm not sure how you surmise that intelligence needs powerful tools and large empires; your following statement seems to undermine this notion.

Our search for intelligent life is a search for intelligent technology- someone who can build powerful radio transmitters or a laser that can outshine a star briefly. There may be intelligences out there that leave no mark on our environment, but we won't be able to detect them.

I surmise that to rise to the top of their food chain, they need increasingly more powerful tools ( which usually also have an application as weapons ) to subjugate their local competitors, and their harsh environments. I find it hard to believe that our first contact will be of a society of one. It's much easier to find a civ of billions than one guy alone on a rock. If we are going to find ETI, they will need to have powerful tools and large empires.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Aethon

[magnemoe]

Lajos and I have debated this point for years in private chat and I'm glad to see his opinion changing somewhat. While I'd love to argue with him (I do every day) he's wrong .

Anyone who lives around a star, has at their disposal a telescope of immense proportions- the gravitational lens of their sun, with which it would be possible to detect our streetlights from a distance of hundreds of light years.

SETI panel Seth Shostak and Frank Drake discuss this very question :https://youtu.be/0bWK5ES3lTE?t=4220

It's only been 100 years since Marconi, and it may have been 100,000 years since their version of Marconi, so I'm not sure human technology should be used as a yard stick by which to judge what is and isn't possible in the universe.

Three problems, first we are moving away from high power unidirectional broadcast and more and more into directional and low power high frequency cells. Unidirectional high power radio waste bandwidth, no way around that.

Second is that they might use other ways to communicate, decent chance that someone with lots of space activity will use lasers in space, they might use something like quantum entanglements too, yes it breaks our physic, but so do very high power unidirectional radio with unlimited bandwidth.

On our end the problem is how many photons you can gather, you need an minimum number of photons every second to get an signal to noise level good enough to get an signal you can identify.

Radio has benefit here in that its easier to scale up antennas, on the other hand an planet reflect more light than any plausible unidirectional radio transmitter (it would be cheaper and simpler to send out interstellar probes)

Reflected light will also happen from any planets not only the ones who build pentawatt radios.

Problem work the other way too, how many photons will hit an square kilometer array at 50 lightyear from an one megawatt unidirectional transmitter on earth?