What are the chances of aliens sniffing us out?

[ToSeek]

What are the chances of aliens sniffing us out?

Beaming signals into space to find ET could potentially be risky for Earth and its inhabitants. So researchers are developing a Richter-like scale to assess the chance that extraterrestrials could detect – and potentially react to – such signals.

Decades of passively monitoring microwave frequencies have failed to find any evidence of signals from extraterrestrial civilisations. Frustrated by the long silence, some researchers want to start transmitting signals towards nearby stars with possible habitable planets in a plan called "active SETI".

However, others warn that this would be the equivalent of "shouting in the jungle", and that it is better to keep quiet for the time being. "Concerns range from worries about potential existential danger all the way to a desire for consensus about what should be said in such messages," says astrophysicist and science fiction writer David Brin, a leading voice of caution on an International Academy of Astronautics committee considering the issue.

[Ronald Brak]

We should weight up all the evidence that beaming radio waves will cause aliens to harm us versus all the evidence that not beaming radio waves into space will cause aliens to harm us.

Hmmm... My scales didn't move at all.

[Frog march]

*WARNING SARCASM*

and we are so careful with our little planet, we look after all the species make sure there is no pollution and we don't use more resources than we can replace. Yes beaming a signal into space would be suicide.

[galacsi]

It is too late no , to ask this kind of question ?
Are we not beaming radio signals in space from the beginning of the 20th century , from Marconni and Tesla time until today ?

[Ronald Brak]

Yes, but most signals humans have sent will be almost impossible to detect. With our current technology we couldn't detect earth if it were only a couple of stars over.

[galacsi]

Yes, but most signals humans have sent will be almost impossible to detect. With our current technology we couldn't detect earth if it were only a couple of stars over.

Interesting i did not know.

[DaveC426913]

(excerpted from article): "...However, others warn that this would be the equivalent of "shouting in the jungle", and that it is better to keep quiet for the time being..."

Yes. We call this Xenophobia.

(excerpted from article): "...says astrophysicist and science fiction writer David Brin, a leading voice of caution..."

Brin. Isn't he the author of the Uplift Series - the series based on the premise that races achieve spacefaring intelligence and wisdom through the benevolent mentorship of a more advanced alien race?

Guess he has had second thoughts...

[eburacum45]

Brin has many interesting thoughts. Apart from (unfortunately) being the author of Kevin Costner's turkey the Postman,
he has also expressed some interesting, and I think very relevant, thoughts on the surveillance culture;
The Transparent Society
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transparent_Society

and he also has made a devastating critique on the medievalism and morality in Star Wars
http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feat.../15/brin_main/

Actually I am interested in whatever this particular geezer has to say, although I don't necessarily agree with it. Incidentally the 'shouting in the jungle' idea was well expressed by another science fiction author, Greg Bear, in his novel 'The Forge Of God';
we are like lost children crying in a wood, while all the while the wolves are gathering...

By the way, the fact that we could not detect our own tv and radio signals from more than a few light years away does not necessarily place any constraints on a hypothetical race of more technologically advanced aliens.

[eburacum45]

But Brin wouldn't let us use the word uplift; so we had to come up with a neologism of our own...(sniff)
Provolve...
.

[Corgon]

Brin. Isn't he the author of the Uplift Series - the series based on the premise that races achieve spacefaring intelligence and wisdom through the benevolent mentorship of a more advanced alien race?

A premise which, as I recall, broke down into war as from those entangled relationships, rather like the begining of WWI.

Besides, who says a piece of fiction represents how somebody thinks the world actually works?

[Doodler]

Let he who judges the Postman by Kevin Costner's movie be flogged with al dente noodles.

As far as detection goes, I'd keep shouting. Lets face it, if they were advanced enough to be a threat, they'd be here already. Somehow, I think with the noise we have been spitting out, if a species were to be in a position to hear it, they're already able to leave their home star system, and will likely have a level of technology we're not going to easily be able to compete with. So if we haven't seen them yet, the odds are, they aren't there to be seen, or they're not a threat to us. No harm, no foul.

Now the alternatives.

So another civilization 8-10 light years away finds out we exist, and aren't thrilled about it, they still can't do more than spit invective at us at lightspeed because they're peeved about finding out they're not alone. You'll pardon me while I shiver myself to extinction.

Even if they were to be detected, make their ire known, and threaten to come finish us, we've got a few centuries of lead time to prepare for their arrival, and/or, the ability to reach out and pimpslap them for their small mindedness.

Eh, somehow, this alien menace doesn't feel all that menacing.

[makaya325]

the reason why we arent recieving signals is because were thinking that theyre just like us. what if sapience is a fluke. what if the galaxy is filled with only animal intelligence.

[Kebsis]

sapience? Is that like monkeyshines?

[RBG]

Since Drake tells us there should be intelligent life all over the universe, doesn't the fact that we haven't found any of it suggest something out there killed it all off? Like maybe a competing organism following Darwin's Natural Selection? (Small degree of seriousness here.)

RBG

[Van Rijn]

Since Drake tells us there should be intelligent life all over the universe

Drake does not tell us that. Drake has an equation that requires you to make a list of assumptions. Pick different assumptions, get different results.

, doesn't the fact that we haven't found any of it suggest something out there killed it all off?

No. Please look at the many, many previous discussions on this. We don't know how likely life is. We don't know how likely technological life is. We don't know how likely star faring species are. We don't know how likely they are to spread to more than one (or a few) stars if they exist. We don't know how hard it would be to detect them.

And so on, and so on. There are dozens of things that could be added to the list. In short, we don't know. We can only speculate.

[PhantomWolf]

What are the chances of aliens sniffing us out?

Depends on if they have been able to develop Professor Farnsworth's Smell-o-scope yet.

[RBG]

Drake does not tell us that. Drake has an equation that requires you to make a list of assumptions. Pick different assumptions, get different results.
<snip>
In short, we don't know. We can only speculate.

Why do you think Drake came up with the equation? It wasn't to give everyone every answer possible because that would be pointless. It's one thing for you to believe Drake's equation is in fact pointless, it's another to say there was no statement being made merely by Drake inventing the equation.

Perhaps you can give me some pointers on speculating.

RBG

[Van Rijn]

Why do you think Drake came up with the equation? It wasn't to give everyone every answer possible because that would be pointless.

It doesn't give an answer. For that, you would need to start with specific evidence that we don't have.

It's one thing for you to believe Drake's equation is in fact pointless, it's another to say there was no statement being made merely by Drake inventing the equation.

I think the Drake equation is fun speculation. Whether there was a "statement" or not is irrelevent to the point that we can't draw a conclusion without evidence.

Perhaps you can give me some pointers on speculating.

RBG

You can start with the part of my post that you snipped when you quoted it. Pick different assumptions for each of those "We don't knows."

[makaya325]

out of all species on earth, we are the only ones to have technology, money, culture, history, etc. thats y i think human like intelligent, not animal like intelligence, is extremely rare

[Eckelston]

Yes, but most signals humans have sent will be almost impossible to detect. With our current technology we couldn't detect earth if it were only a couple of stars over.

You might not be able to detect the individual signal but it is quite possible to detect Earth in the radio range. There was a thread on this not long ago. An article claimed that SKA would be able to Earth's analog from as far 1000 pc.

The point is that detection is much, much easier than actually influencing Earth in any way. If there's anything out there with the ability to destroy us and it is actually looking for us, then we are pretty much screwed.

[RBG]

It doesn't give an answer. For that, you would need to start with specific evidence that we don't have.

Just like that other fun speculation, String Theory. Of course it doesn't give an answer, Drake is making a statement about the abundance of life in the universe. A statement that I use beginning with "Since Drake tells us..." You don't have to buy into any of it. Just as you don't have to buy into any of my answers to your speculative questions.

If it helps, leave Drake out of it. Try: Since we have hard evidence to conclude with 100% certainty that intelligent life exists on one planet of the small number of planets we know about; then in a universe where there are more stars than grains of sand on all the beaches of the world; it's a reasonable assumption that there could be intelligent life on countless other planets orbiting those stars.

I think the Drake equation is fun speculation. Whether there was a "statement" or not is irrelevent to the point that we can't draw a conclusion without evidence.."

But it's completely relevant in so far as he believes there is life everywhere out there and I paraphrase him. Call it a hypothesis if that makes you feel better since they are used in science without much evidence. Or call it speculation. I read somewhere once: "We can only speculate."

You can start with the part of my post that you snipped when you quoted it. Pick different assumptions for each of those "We don't knows."

Hmmm. Do you think doing that could take me right back to something similar to "Since Drake tells us"? I reject your speculation and substitute my own. Or Drake's anyway.

Sheesh. Thank goodness you didn't have a problem with the rest of my post re something killing off all the aliens.

RBG

[Van Rijn]

Just like that other fun speculation, String Theory.

Well, there is data and some actual substance behind string theories, but yes, there is substantial speculation in that area of physics, and I don't think anyone can be sure quite where that will settle out.

Of course it doesn't give an answer, Drake is making a statement about the abundance of life in the universe. A statement that I use beginning with "Since Drake tells us..." You don't have to buy into any of it. Just as you don't have to buy into any of my answers to your speculative questions.

If it helps, leave Drake out of it. Try: Since we have hard evidence to conclude with 100% certainty that intelligent life exists on one planet of the small number of planets we know about; then in a universe where there are more stars than grains of sand on all the beaches of the world; it's a reasonable assumption that there could be intelligent life on countless other planets orbiting those stars.

A single example tells us nothing. You may think it is reasonable, but it is still an assumption based on a lack of data. But more to the point, let's get back to your statement, the one at issue:

Since Drake tells us there should be intelligent life all over the universe, doesn't the fact that we haven't found any of it suggest something out there killed it all off?

As you've admitted, it isn't Drake, but your assumption that there should be intelligent life "all over the universe." You also assume that it should be so common and so obviously detectable by current methods that not detecting them implies they were killed off. Now you've taken an idea (there could be other intelligent life in the universe) and added several more assumptions to the list.

Sheesh. Thank goodness you didn't have a problem with the rest of my post re something killing off all the aliens.

RBG

Did you read my post? Let me make it clearer. Your premise is incorrect. Since there is no reason to assume that we would be able to detect intelligent ETs if they existed, then no, there is nothing to suggest anything is killing them off.

[Doodler]

The Drake equation is a thought exercise. A nice skeleton that we can come back later and put the muscle and organs on to get a better idea of what we're up against. We're only just now starting to get an idea of the values to put into the first bits of the equation.

The number of stars, number of stars with planets, number of planets where water could exist. That's it. Any value beyond that point, and you're in handwaving territory, or pure belief over fact. Even the first three numbers can't be pinned down exactly. Its a roadmap at best, and we're barely a few steps underway.

That would seem to be the healthiest outlook on Drake.

[RBG]

A single example tells us nothing.

"Nothing"?
Would you say that if MER spotted only one ET on Mars? How about a single example of Pi dividing out evenly? Of ghosts? Or a single example of Bob Saget being humorous?

As you've admitted, it isn't Drake, but your assumption that there should be intelligent life "all over the universe." You also assume that it should be so common and so obviously detectable by current methods that not detecting them implies they were killed off. Now you've taken an idea (there could be other intelligent life in the universe) and added several more assumptions to the list.

Yes, the speculation thing... go on...

Did you read my post? Let me make it clearer. Your premise is incorrect. Since there is no reason to assume that we would be able to detect intelligent ETs if they existed, then no, there is nothing to suggest anything is killing them off.

You're almost funnier than me.

RBG

[Van Rijn]

"Nothing"?
Would you say that if MER spotted only one ET on Mars?

That would be evidence of life on a second world. That would be very important evidence, especially given the conditions on Mars. We would know that life exists on more than one world.

As for the rest of your post, I didn't see anything relevant to the discussion.

[Serenitude]

Isn't there technically life on two worlds now? I was under the impression Apollo astronauts found staff living on a lense left behind in an earlier mission?

[eburacum45]

I was under the impression Apollo astronauts found stuff living on a lens left behind in an earlier mission?

Yes; that was Surveyor 3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_3
although there is some debate whether the material was introduced after retrieval by contamination.

[Serenitude]

Ahhh. Thankies much

[Van Rijn]

Isn't there technically life on two worlds now? I was under the impression Apollo astronauts found staff living on a lense left behind in an earlier mission?

There may have been dormant streptococcus spores found in a protected location in the returned Surveyor 3 TV camera. Or that might have been post-mission contamination done before the tests. Of course, technically, there were humans and various microbes on the moon during the Apollo landings as well. This isn't the same thing as finding living, metabolizing indigenous life on another world.

Edited to add:

I see eburacum45 covered some of this. I wrote this post and was caught by the upgrade, and left it in the buffer to post afterwards. *sigh*

[RBG]

My point, of course, being the obvious value of *single* examples, as there seemed to be some confusion.

The lack of relevance of the rest arises from your repetitive and simultaneous positions of both backing and disputing the worthiness of speculation.

I say speculation is the precursor of hypothesis which is an essential part of the scientific method.

All that remains is whether your speculation is any better than mine or Drake's.

So where was I? Something about aliens and Natural Selection...

RBG