SETI has it wrong!

[FrankM]

SETI starts out with the premise that the species they tag as "extra-terrestrial intelligence" will be using the earth second for determining the numeric values used for frequency. The intelligent species are using a "universal time unit" which has a different duration than the second. The universal time unit has a duration of about 0.6255... that of the SI second.

 

SETI has its receivers set to listen to a certain range of the electromagnetic spectrum (in the hydrogen well), and because they start out with the wrong time base, they do not cover the most logical offsets from the center frequency.

 

If you add Pi or 2Pi to a smaller value it will result in a bigger change. SETI is not listening to the proper offset range, which is illustrated in the pdf article below.

 

http://vip.ocsnet.net/~ancient/SETI-Offset.pdf

 

The mathematical basis of the universal time unit would be known by all truly intelligent species.

[Buffy]

SETI starts out with the premise that the species they tag as "extra-terrestrial intelligence" will be using the earth second for determining the numeric values used for frequency. The intelligent species are using a "universal time unit" which has a different duration than the second. The universal time unit has a duration of about 0.6255... that of the SI second.

Huh? Seti doesn't care what the frequency is in terms of "finding significance" very broad ranges of frequencies are being examined, and of course we state the results in our units, but that's for our convenience. The Seti algorithms slice, dice, skew and transform the data all over the place to try to find anything of significance: there is no "center frequency." How would this be "hiding" the information.

 

And what evidence is there that "intelligent species are using a 'universal time unit'"? How would we know? :)

 

The mathematical basis of the universal time unit would be known by all truly intelligent species.

So we're not very intelligent as a species? Or is it just that the Seti folks that are all stupid? Can you explain why this has happened if its so obvious?

 

Do you have a source for any of this that you can reference?

 

Over 150000 work units processed,

Buffy

[CraigD]

SETI starts out with the premise that the species they tag as "extra-terrestrial intelligence" will be using the earth second for determining the numeric values used for frequency.

My impression (I’ve no personal contact or experience with the SETI project) is that they are mostly still looking for “spikes” in the brightness of small areas of the sky in the 1,420 cycles/sec (MHz) to 1,662 MHz ”water hole” range, because this range lies between a couple of “sensible” emission frequencies of H and OH, and because EM radiation in the wider 1,000 to 10,000 MHz range within which it lies is little absorbed by Earths atmosphere or emitted by natural sources – a “quiet zone”.

 

This frequency band is units-independent. It doesn’t matter whether we call it 1420-1662 Mhz, 2270-2657 cycles/”natural time unit”, or any other angular distance/time unit. It is still the same range, valid based on the assumptions that someone wanting to be heard would send a strong signal in a narrow frequency band within it.

 

Personally, I think a more assumption-free approach would be to look at the power-of-two frequencies in the 1-10 GHz quite zone – 2^30, 2^31, 2^32, and 2^33 Hz. I recall from a lecture from a SETI person I heard years ago that they do pay attention to these frequencies, but not as much as the water hole. I guess if I want my personal best guess to be SETI policy, I need to work for them and become influential – the guys with the keys to the big dishes are not too likely to be impressed with advice from a medical applications programmer, even one with “reputation beyond repute” at hypography. :)

 

I think a case can be made that if a ETI with a big transmitter want to be heard by another ETI (us), they’d try to imagine where several line of reasoning would lead, and hit the water hole, powers of two, and other possible “special” frequencies with some easy-to-decypher, AM, low-speed binary data. That a couple of decades of SETI (mostly Arecibo’s SERENDIP) has viewed over 20% of the sky, and found no such signal, tells us, I think, that

1. There are almost certainly (p>.99) not more than 20 such ETIs transmitting “now” (unless, for some reason, they’re all hunkered down to the south
    
   
2. If SETI keeps up its current pace, particularly looking at more of the southern and polar skys, it should be clear within a decade or two if such a signal exists to be found
   

Our galactic neighborhood is certainly not crowded with welcoming neighbors. It remains to be seen if it’s completely empty of them.

[FrankM]

And what evidence is there that "intelligent species are using a 'universal time unit'"? How would we know?

 

We wouldn't know if everyone concluded that the Western scientific culture is the only source of advanced "scientific knowledge".

 

The mathematical basis of the universal time unit would be known by all truly intelligent species.

 

You won't find the following process in any contemporary Western scientific texts. Build yourself a right triangle with the numeric value of of 628.318 (10^6) as its vertical leg dimension and a hypotenuse with a 1420.405 (10^6) dimension. These are electromagnetic (EM) frequencies. We customarily present frequencies using a 10^6 multiplier so the vertical leg is 2Pi with the decimal place shifted two places to the right times a multiplier. Now rotate the angle to 45 degrees while keeping the vertical leg constant. The numeric value of the hypotenuse at 45 degrees represents the exact same spectrum position as the value of the hypotenuse at 26.25400 degrees. You can develop the complete mathematical process knowing the geometric EM relationships. Just keep in mind that the "dimensions" of the inverse proportional relationship between wavelength and frequency are embedded within the geometric relationships.

 

So we're not very intelligent as a species? Or is it just that the Seti folks that are all stupid? Can you explain why this has happened if its so obvious?

The above needs to be parsed into its components. I will start a thread in the "Philosophy" section titled "We're not very intelligent as a species."

 

I did not state that any of the SETI folks are stupid. Some of the "policy making" SETI folks make assumptions that are demonstrably biased. Craig makes some comments that relate to this in his post that followed yours. Why would any ETI create an emission source that replicates the inefficient and crude modulation techniques of a society that has just recently discovered the ability to create and modulate EM emissions? We are just barely 120 years from recognizing EM waves existed. If such a signal were detected I can anticipate the conclusion, "They are no more technically advanced than we are, so there is little we learn from them?"

[Buffy]

We wouldn't know if everyone concluded that the Western scientific culture is the only source of advanced "scientific knowledge".

Is there another source you're quoting from?

You won't find the following process in any contemporary Western scientific texts. Build yourself a right triangle with the numeric value of of 628.318 (10^6) as its vertical leg dimension and a hypotenuse with a 1420.405 (10^6) dimension. These are electromagnetic (EM) frequencies....

Cool! But you don't describe why this process has any significance, nor why its superior.

 

More importantly though, as Craig said "the frequency band is units independent" which was my point as well, is the reason why your argument doesn't seem to make sense, yet you don't address this at all. Could you? It would be most enlightening to understand more about what argument you're making here.

Some of the "policy making" SETI folks make assumptions that are demonstrably biased. Craig makes some comments that relate to this in his post that followed yours.

Probably, but how does this relate to a "choice of frequency units?" They're clearly using units you disagree with, but as we've said, that's arbitrary and doesn't seem to have any impact on how signals are interpreted. Please expand on what specific Seti policies are off and why they lead to hiding significant results.

 

Why would any ETI create an emission source that replicates the inefficient and crude modulation techniques of a society that has just recently discovered the ability to create and modulate EM emissions?

No particualr reason at all. Quite possibly there is some different mechanism for communicating, but the EM spectrum is what we know. As Craig points out, the main activity of Seti is simply to find spikes *at all*, not even getting to figuring out any modulation techniques they might be using. Its notable that a modulation technique that left the EM spectrum showing perfectly Poisson distributed data elements would represent quite a challenge in debugging any system you built on it, and I could probably drag out some information theory that would show it might not be parsable at all without absolute understanding of the underlying algorithm for assembling a possibly spread spectrum message (great encryption though!).

 

Conversely, if we know of no other ways to utilize the EM spectrum for communications, where else do we start? Do you want to argue that we should find an algorithm first and then start looking? Which algorithm? How do we decide if its something and advanced civilization would use?

 

You seem to speak from a position of "Knowledge Not Known to Western Science": where is this "hidden knowledge?" Is there a conspiracy to supress it? Can you refer me to a book or a web site?

 

Knowledge is infectious,

Buffy

[FrankM]

Conversely, if we know of no other ways to utilize the EM spectrum for communications, where else do we start?

I will agree we do not have any other current options for high speed space communications other than the EM spectrum, so we work with it the best way we currently know.

 

You won't find the following process in any contemporary Western scientific texts. Build yourself a right triangle with the numeric value of of 628.318 (10^6) as its vertical leg dimension and a hypotenuse with a 1420.405 (10^6) dimension. These are electromagnetic (EM) frequencies....

Cool! But you don't describe why this process has any significance, nor why its superior.

 

If you have broken the triangle down to its basic components, you will have identified the EM half (in its primitive form) of the wavelength frequency right triangle pairs. At the 45 degree angle, the "primitive" value for the vertical leg is 2Pi and the hypotenuse is the square root of 2 times 2Pi. The original dimension set I had to work with was that of the wavelength half of the triangle pair, a vertical leg of 21.106 cm and a hypotenuse of 47.713 cm (it really wasn't in centimeters originally, I use that measurement system now as that is the current official system). I recognized the meaning of the vertical leg immediately, and after taking calculator in hand I determined the frequency equivalents of the two "wavelengths". I did not understand the real significance of the numeric value of the hypotenuse value, even though I knew it translated to the 628.31 (10^6) value in frequency. Its meaning is not simply just 2Pi times a multiplier.

 

For the wavelength side of the pair, in primitive units, simply draw a 45 degree right triangle and notate the vertical leg equal to "1" and the hypotenuse equal to the square root of 2.

 

If you draw the frequency and wavelength triangles side by side you will notice that the vertical leg of each of the triangles represents the hypotenuse of the opposite triangle. When the product of the vertical leg of one triangle times the hypotenuse of the second triangle are equal for both sets, the triangles are mutual, one is the inverse of the other. That value is also the numeric value for the constant of proportionality between wavelength and frequency; we call it the speed of light. You now have an algorithm whereby the speed of light can be expressed in a different set of units, and the translation is seamless. The algorithm allows you to get rid of the artificiallity of SI units and permits you to define the speed of light in terms of geometric relationships, mathematical constants, and using a fundamental property of the physical universe. Applying wavelengths and frequencies to the elements that define a right triangle embeds within the pair of geometric relationships the "units" that describe the constant of proportionality between wavelength and frequency.

 

I cannot provide to you the "mathematical proof" of the geometric relationships, but I can describe most parts of the process. The key to the process was defining the "primitive unit" of frequency as 2Pi. A frequency of 2Pi, or any tens multiple of division of that number, are the only values where "angular frequency" and "frequency" converge, thus one can "scale" the frequency where you can use the wavelength of one of the most basic emissions in the universe as a dimensional value of the wavelength triangle pair. I did not invent the process, I extracted it.

 

I describe the whole process in the Primitive.pdf article.

 

http://vip.ocsnet.net/~ancient/Primitive.pdf

 

Its notable that a modulation technique that left the EM spectrum showing perfectly Poisson distributed data elements would represent quite a challenge in debugging any system you built on it, and I could probably drag out some information theory that would show it might not be parsable at all without absolute understanding of the underlying algorithm for assembling a possibly spread spectrum message (great encryption though!).

Spread spectrum is one of the most efficient modulation techniques we currently know, and due to the inherent noise that will be introduced by many sources in space, this may be one of the processes of choice for an ETI, possibly direct sequence.

 

Although SETI search processes do not care in what "time duration" the numeric value of a frequency is defined, there are many "private" radio telescopes that are examining very specific frequencies, and it is those user that would be looking in the wrong place in the spectrum if they insist on using the SI second to determine frequency and a specific offset.

 

 

Is there a conspiracy to supress it?

No, it is done naturally by the arrogance of every current generation that consider themselves better educated and informed than any of their predecessor generations. Embedded within the current generations education are the conclusions made many decades, even centuries ago, by individuals who would now be considered scientifically backward. You might think that this archaic carry-forward knowledge is typically limited to the "social sciences", which covers things like folklore. Not so. Even some of the best educated scientists of a century or more ago provide carry-forward knowledge that is embedded into our cultural heritage, and few if anybody is examining some of the old "conclusions" which are now part of what we consider a valid knowledge base. I can read on the WWW right now so-called "scientific conclusions" made a century or more ago about some ancient culture that no one bothers to examine for validity based upon what we know today. I will put an example on the "History Forum" section that is from a currently sold book to illustrate my point, and the thread title will be "Ancient forges".

 

Do you know what our scientists knew about EM wavelength frequency relationships 150-200 years ago? What would you think they would have concluded if they found a dimension that equaled 21.106 cm or 47.713 cm?

[Buffy]

If you have broken the triangle down to its basic components, you will have identified the EM half (in its primitive form) of the wavelength frequency right triangle pairs....[lots 'o basic trigonometry with some vague allusions to numerological significance of the square root of 2 deleted]...You now have an algorithm whereby the speed of light can be expressed in a different set of units, and the translation is seamless. The algorithm allows you to get rid of the artificiallity of SI units and permits you to define the speed of light in terms of geometric relationships, mathematical constants, and using a fundamental property of the physical universe. Applying wavelengths and frequencies to the elements that define a right triangle embeds within the pair of geometric relationships the "units" that describe the constant of proportionality between wavelength and frequency.

Cool! But again, so what? You've come up with a different unit. Why is it important? How does it make the results differ?

A frequency of 2Pi, or any tens multiple of division of that number, are the only values where "angular frequency" and "frequency" converge, thus one can "scale" the frequency where you can use the wavelength of one of the most basic emissions in the universe as a dimensional value of the wavelength triangle pair.

All this does is say there are some natural locations, but it does not say that these locations would not be found unless we used your units.

Spread spectrum is one of the most efficient modulation techniques we currently know, and due to the inherent noise that will be introduced by many sources in space, this may be one of the processes of choice for an ETI, possibly direct sequence.

Well, sorta, it has its drawbacks, but you know what? Spread spectrum would *still* show spikes in emmissions, because it depends on being able to "home in" on the frequencies that are being transmitted on. If you *purposely* wanted to hide transmissions and keep the output within the range of the background noise, you'd be pretty paranoid to do so. I'm not sure I'd even *want* to talk to someone that paranoid! SO this still does not provide any basis for showing why we would not see spikes from a traditional survey unless we used your "special units".

Although SETI search processes do not care in what "time duration" the numeric value of a frequency is defined, there are many "private" radio telescopes that are examining very specific frequencies, and it is those user that would be looking in the wrong place in the spectrum if they insist on using the SI second to determine frequency and a specific offset.

No, they'd simply be looking at the wrong frequency no matter which unit they were using. As Craig described above there are many reasons to look at different frequencies, but none of them are dependent upon the units.

No, it is done naturally by the arrogance of every current generation that consider themselves better educated and informed than any of their predecessor generations....

Arrogance is next to conspiraciness! :confused: Sure! But no one is being *kept* from trying various frequencies. I think most Seti folk would be happy to try any frequency that had an argument behind it!

 

So anyway just to beat the dead horse: your main complaint still seems to be that they have to use different units. But its still not clear that units have anything to do with anything. It can be some interesting ratio like you've described or "cycles per centon" if you're a Battlestar Gallactica fan, they're still going to point to specific points in the electromagnetic spectrum and that's what we tune our receivers to. The points being selected are indeed based on ratios or computations like yours, but the units can be translated into any scale you want: the units continue to be a convenient but completely irrelevant.

 

Can you address this? I've got enough math to understand the ratio you're describing, you just keep saying nothing about why we should think that "SETI is all wrong" because it doesn't use your units....

 

Laughs per minute,

Buffy

[FrankM]

I'm not sure I'd even *want* to talk to someone that paranoid!

I don't know where you get the idea that you or SETI are going to talk to anyone, and thus have a reason to be paranoid about the type of EM modulation process used. If the ETIs know how to propagate EM signals to a very distant receiver near instantaneously, we wouldn't know how to respond in the same manner.

 

No, they'd simply be looking at the wrong frequency no matter which unit they were using. As Craig described above there are many reasons to look at different frequencies, but none of them are dependent upon the units.

 

I agree with Craig, an individual spectrum position by itself has no dependence on units, but if you want to tell somebody else to look at the same place you need to specify a common agreed upon measurement system.

 

If one wanted to examine a precise offset from a spectrum position of 1420.405 (10^6) the units used are critical. The graphical presentation used in the first post illustrates the difference if one used the duration of the SI second versus that of the "universal time unit". I have communicated with several individuals that have "private" radio telescope systems and they are looking at specific offsets from the 1420.405 value. They think there are logical reasons to examine the spectrum at specific offsets. I think they are correct, and the source documents(s) where I extracted the mathematical process that defines the EM triangle pairs strongly suggests 2pi is a universal key for a variety of "extractions".

 

We already know that 2Pi is a critical value in many scientific calculations, thus it wasn't completely strange when I found that value was the "key" to the triangle pairs process.

 

"Do you know what our scientists knew about EM wavelength frequency relationships 150-200 years ago? What would you think they would have concluded if they found a dimension that equaled 21.106 cm or 47.713 cm?"

[FrankM]

Can you address this? I've got enough math to understand the ratio you're describing, you just keep saying nothing about why we should think that "SETI is all wrong" because it doesn't use your units....

 

I want to address this question separately, but I will need a little more time to express my answer.

[FrankM]

Can you address this? I've got enough math to understand the ratio you're describing, you just keep saying nothing about why we should think that "SETI is all wrong" because it doesn't use your units....

 

They are not "my units". The units are a result of the relationships within the wavelength frequency triangle pairs. The units are mutually created using mathematical constants and the unit relationships within a basic physical science "truth", the inverse proportional relationship between an electromagnetic (EM) wavelength and a frequency.

 

In a sense I am targeting SETI somewhat unfairly in this thread as they are not responsible for the units they use, but they are part of the "physics community" that is responsible for supporting a system of units that have nothing to do with the rest of the universe. Physicist-mathematicians have been trying to find a "system of natural units" that fit the "real physical universe" for many decades. What is interesting is that several approaches to developing "natural units" remove the current SI definition for the "speed-of-light" (SOL) from the process. If you use the SI definition you are stuck with the "meter" and the "second". The new definitions for the "unit of length (L)" and the "unit of time (T)" are defined using the numeric values of other physical science constants. The "natural unit systems" are attempting to find units for mathematical algorithms that might reveal natural relationships within the real physical universe.

 

Unfortunately, to create their "natural systems" they artificially define one or more of the other "physical science constants" as being equal to "one". Additionally, all of the attempts to develop a natural system of units utilized a step-by-step process, each step creating one element of the definition set, then creating the next definition using a similar process. The SI uses a serial step process, it first defines a "second" and all related units are defined from that starting value.

 

The process used to develop the wavelength frequency triangle pair relationships does not start out by defining the values for length or the duration of the time unit. The value for the SOL, and the associated units, are the result of "mutual relationships", these being obtained from mathematical constants.

 

If you examine the numeric values for the triangle pair that illustrates the results using SI units, you will recognize that the numeric value of SOL would be the same as the frequency if the "natural unit of length" was that of the wavelength of the neutral hydrogen emission; multiply the SI value for the SOL by 4.737961..., the number of times 21.106cm goes into 1 meter. That removes the "meter" from the process, as the length is now "one" in a non-metric unit of length, but we know its physical length is equivalent to 21.1061 cm or 8.3097 inches.

 

If you want to remove the SI second from the process you rotate the angle to 45 degrees, this being the angle where the wavelength and frequency pairs are defined in their "primitive" units. At that angle the duration of the "time unit" is defined relative to two mathematical constants.

 

Any intelligent species that has developed their science and mathematics to approximately the same primitive level as we are today could have identified the process described in the "Primitive.pdf" article, unless their "scientific community" was also hammered into accepting a system of units that was designed for commerical use.

 

Maxwell recommended the scientific community adopt a length value different than the meter.

 

The most universal standard of length which we could assume would be the wavelength of a particular kind of light... Such a standard would be independent of any changes in the dimensions of the earth, and should be adopted by those who expect their writings to be more permanent than that body. James Clerk Maxwell, 1873

 

Maxwell didn't know about the hydrogen emission wavelength, but if he had I think he would have approved of its use as a unit of length. The commercial interests won, and they still control the SI.

 

In summary, the two units and the SOL directly created by the process are intimately linked to the physical universe, unlike the current SI basic units. Think how the mathematically defined SOL can be used to redefine the joule and ampere, such that these units can be brought into harmony with the real physical science universe.

[FrankM]

Buffy, I have continued my SETI quest through other sources and an email I received yesterday from a SETI principle was in response to a statement I made about "private" radio telescopes.

 

The "private radio telescopes" that you refer to are typically single 3 meter satellite dishes attached to a PC. Compared to SETI's Allen Telescope Array project and the tremendous effort that went into analyzing all aspects of the data acquisition algorisms/analysis/interpretation those 3 m dishes are no more than a local high school model rocket club is to the Apollo Program.

 

The pure signal detection capability of Arecibo and the Allen arrays are inarguably superior to what individuals will achieve with his/her backyard dish, but the backyard researcher can concentrate on or relatively quickly change to signal processing techniques that are not covered by the various SETI systems. If the historical record of past scientific "discoveries" can be used as a precedent, I strongly suspect that it won't be the pure signal detection capability that will identify an ETI emission, it will be done by someone who was not constrained in how they processed the signals in a specific spectrum range.

 

SETI Home issues newsletters periodically on a variety of topics, but these have diminished in quantity recently.

 

Science Newsletters

 

One of these newsletters discussed the improbability that a certain type of emission detected was from an ETI. I think they are assuming that all ETI emissions will be from a "stationary" source. I think the SETI folks are pandering to the public, which provides them funds, by telling them an emission has be persistent and regular, thus qualifying as a "message from an advanced civilization".

 

SETI@home Leaders Deny Reports of Likely Extraterrestrial Signal - Planetary News | The Planetary Society

 

It would be much more realistic if the SETI folk would state whether an observed signal did or did not have a high probability of being artificial. With the Allen array they will be able to stay in a specific "sky sector" longer, thus increasing the probability an emission would be observed for a longer period of time.

 

I haven't been able to find within the SETI Home pages just what emission "modulation modes" they are examining, perhaps you can provide that info.

[C1ay]

Any intelligent species that has developed their science and mathematics to approximately the same primitive level as we are today could have identified the process described in the "Primitive.pdf" article, unless their "scientific community" was also hammered into accepting a system of units that was designed for commerical use.

 

Isn't that assuming that they would think like us? What if there's some species out there with 3 digits on each of their handlike appendages instead of 5. Do you think they might do their math in base 6 instead of base 10. What is they have 5 hands instead of two? Might they use base 30 instead of base 10? How can you assume that any standard that we use to try and determine if some noise coming from space has an intelligent origin? What exactly would be left of your claim if you dropped all assumptions about what some alien life may or may not do?

[FrankM]

Isn't that assuming that they would think like us? What if there's some species out there with 3 digits on each of their handlike appendages instead of 5. Do you think they might do their math in base 6 instead of base 10. What is they have 5 hands instead of two? Might they use base 30 instead of base 10? How can you assume that any standard that we use to try and determine if some noise coming from space has an intelligent origin?...

 

If fingers or hands have something to do with developing a "numbering system" we must have had some unusual personages in the Sumerian (base 60) and Mayan (base 20) systems. You would obtain the same results in the Primitive.pdf article regardless of the numeric base system used, but the numeric values would be different. Everything is relative to the numeric system in use.

 

Most people I know have never listened to the signals in the electromagnetic (EM) spectrum with a receiver that was not built to automatically provide certain demodulation processes. I have done this myself with a specific type of EM receiver, and what you take for granted as intelligent signals produced by analog processes, such as AM, FM, PM, SSB, come across as various types of "noise", they are unintelligible to our hearing. These types of signals produce "signatures" that would suggest artificial sources, and it would be easier to make this conclusion if you have a receiver than can capture and display the full spectral signature. These type of transmission types would be typical of a society that has just developed EM transmission and reception capability. SSB or DSB modulation techniques (single sideband, double sideband) were known and applied as early as 1915.

 

Gradually, all the communications systems on earth are being switched to digital modulation techniques, these being more power efficient in how they encode information and are more tolerant of extraneous noise. DSSS (direct sequence spread spectrum), SSB DSSS, and UWB (ultra-wideband) accomplish the same, putting all the power into the information pulses and eliminating the carrier. UWB is the most efficient modulation process we currently know of and the number of different ways the information can be encoded is basically unlimited.

 

Digital modulation processes are essentially a pulse position type modulation technique, with the pulse position being determined by an encoding algorithm.

 

UWB will appear as noise and, depending upon ones technology development, can be encoded across multiple gigahertz spectrum. As far as ETI transmissions, the best we can do at the moment is to identify persistent clusters of signals (pulses) coming from a specific area in our galaxy.

[IDMclean]

I understand, I think, what you mean by the universal unit that you have exposed here.

 

What Frank is talking about here is a value versus a relationship. that the relationship is identified by a key value matters little. that is it isn't the value that is so important it in the importance of that specific value.

 

Like prime numbers. There is some stupid number of possible values for an arbitrary definition. There is a far more limited number of possible values for a relational definition.

 

Part of the SETI thing is that we are sending out signals not in english per say but in mathematics. English is fairly unique (compared to other life on this planet, or tribes of human), mathematics however is fairly universal.

 

Any sufficiently advanced culture would be able to find a key value as he purposes, and tag it as artifical. Not so necessarily of existing definitions.

[Buffy]

Part of the SETI thing is that we are sending out signals not in english per say but in mathematics. English is fairly unique (compared to other life on this planet, or tribes of human), mathematics however is fairly universal.

 

Any sufficiently advanced culture would be able to find a key value as he purposes, and tag it as artifical. Not so necessarily of existing definitions.

But we're not even that far yet! Not only are we not *sending* signals as a part of any current Seti project (unless you call the plaque on Voyager an attempt to communicate), we're not even trying to "decode" or "demodulate" any signals yet, because we first have to find a "signal" that has a strength that would indicate it might potentially be artificial and carrying some sort of information. As I mentioned above, even for spread-spectrum signals, there would be "greater than background" signal strength (albeit on multiple frequencies) that would be detectable unless the sender was purposely trying to hide them by making them identical to "background".

 

So I really don't need to know about AM or FM or spread-spectrum digital in order to find out if *something* is being sent that's not naturally occurring.

 

So again, I can understand that there might be some usefulness in eventually looking at different ratios and frequency units to decode the communications, but since we're not even there yet, the accusation in the title of this thread is pretty slanderous...

 

Looking for any signal at all,

Buffy

[IDMclean]

Well on that front I would make the assertion that if I were to reveal my planet's location with broadcast, I would perhaps do so in such a way that a minimum processing capability is necessary.

 

Thinking tactically and all that. I mean what if we start really broadcasting and we attract some hostiles? I mean what is the guarentee that ETIs would respond favorably?

 

Given how paranoid our (the American) nation is of say the Islamic nations, or the communist nations. I would think this is a fair line of thinking. I mean, how trusting is your average life form period of other life forms?

 

I am willing to bet that they would hide intellegently, so that only sufficiently advanced aliens (that's us) would have a snow ball's chance of discovering at least three things. The Signal, The Language, and The Message. This of course is sequential and without sufficient processing would be near unbreakable encryption. Without the signal, you can't try and decode The Language, without The Language you can't try and decode The Message.

 

I think of it like a mixture of Survival Instinct and Prime Directive (don't give civilizations technology that will allow them to blow themselves up with great ease; IE Antimatter).

 

I have been pondering the puzzle of how would SETI or any other like project listen in on interstellar communications if a sufficiently advanced culture decided to hide their communications in with natural occurance.

 

That is hide their signal in the background so only quantum or photonic computing (or better) would have a hope of picking out the signal.

 

I have been pondering such because I have been developing a plot for a sci-fi book, and what I realized early on was that distribution of information across stellar distances is trouble some. So if two sufficiently advanced civs start talking the first thing to get communicated would likely be a method of communication. A standard, then perhap a better method to communicate.

 

If we assume a method of sending faster than c signals, then it is likely that any civ trying to communicate to interstellar civs would transmit data for the faster than c tech. However you wouldn't simply send this info out haphazardly, there is a myriad of reasons why this is so, you would secure the data so it can only be used by somebody who is ready to use it, and use it responsibly.

 

Therefore I would bet that the criteria by which a sufficiently advanced civ would rate civs is three fold. Processing power, power generation, and communication capability.

 

Am I making sense, or just rambling?

[InfiniteNow]

Too many assumptions in this thread. As noted, first a signal must be found.

 

Only then can it be deciphered for issues such as content, intention of source, and next steps from us.

 

 

To begin speculating on best frequencies and whether or not their signal was intentionally sent or not is a waste of our resources. If we find a source, we decide then.

 

Maybe Frank or another poster could instead use their intellect to propose how, using existing resources, the search for signals in general could be improved.