Why is the US alone in SETI?

[Beerina]

I wrote a short story for 10-grade English that featured a group of Christians making first contact with not one, but two civilizations. Then they discover that those two civilizations were once at war, but were now in a stand-off due to mutually-assured destruction.

The cause of the war? One civilization's Messiah was killed by hanging, and the other's was killed by drowning. Thus, the former wore nooses around their necks, and the latter wore small millstones around theirs.

When those civilizations realized that "our" Messiah was killed by crucifixion -- which they both considered a barbaric abomination -- they came together and declared Holy War on us!

The story was written in the first person (singular) as a series of journal entries of the last known survivor of the Christian Pan-Genocide.

I got a B+.

Maybe I can re-write it and post it somewhere.

Makes you long for the days when the only thing invaders did was smash your altars and make you kneel to strange gods.

 

[shadron]

Is SETI science? How could you prove that there was no life in the Galaxy (other than our own) that sends out radio waves? If you cannot, then SETI could go on forever.

How does it fit in with this loop?


Scientific method.

Well, I'd say they've framed the question and are observing. What's the problem?

 

[Georg]

Well, I'd say they've framed the question and are observing. What's the problem?

I guess he/she talks about the problem that a hypothesis like "There is alien intelligence" is not falsifiable and therefore point 4 of his link:

Perform experiment and collect data

could be a neverending endeavour. No results guaranteed, but a lot of money spent. If I´m wrong, rjh01, please correct me.
That´s why I like the idea of it not being government funded (there are more important ways to spend tax money), but supported by curious normal people.
Since I am curious, here are my questions:

If I want to join seti@home, what are the computer system requirements?
Will running the programme slow my computer down? (My computer is not the best, I couldn´t afford a noticeable worse performance, but would be willing to spend some bucks on higher electricity costs)

 

[Beerina]

Prolly a Win 95 machine could still run it, but they have increased the "work unit" size to keep up with increasing processor speed every once in awhile.

What they did a few years ago was convert Seti@home to use a distributed computing framework called "Boinc!"

What you do nowadays is install Boinc! (the web site has links), and then you pick which project(s) you want Boinc! to run on your computer.

Seti@home is one, so is Folding@home (the protein folding one) and a number of other, lesser-known ones. Boinc! will automatically detect the number of processors you have and spawn off a low-priority background thread for each one, each one having its own work unit.

I have a Pentium IV 3200MHz with "Hyperthreading", which, while not true dual-processor, makes itself appear as a dual processor to the operating system, so Boinc! runs two Seti@Home threads on my computer.

When I first started, I could crank through a work unit in a little more than an hour. Nowadays it's about 10-12 hours. Really about 24 hours for 2, so divide by 2.

By the way, a number of people have written Seti clients that use the massive power in some of the top-end 3D cards to calculate an order of magnitude even faster. Some I think have even started messing around with calculations on a dedicated FPGA board, but I don't know about that one much.

You can look up all that stuff on the web site. Just go to setiathome.com and it'll start you off.

 

[Georg]

Thanks a lot for the answer. I´ll certainly give it a try.
When a unit is about 10-12 hours, does that mean my computer has to be on for that long time? Or, what I´d think, the work is just interupted when I shut it down and continued the next time I start it? Sorry, (technical) idiot here.

 

[Cuddles]

I think most other countries are still busy with STI.

Is SETI science? How could you prove that there was no life in the Galaxy (other than our own) that sends out radio waves? If you cannot, then SETI could go on forever.

How does it fit in with this loop?


Scientific method.

This doesn't really make sense. No single experiment is "science". Science is a method that works in the manner you describe, experiments and data are simply one of the steps. SETI is gathering and analysing data. That's it. Whether the data is used to support a scientific hypothesis or not is a completely different question. The question you need to ask is "Is the hypothesis that there is/is not extraterristrial life a scientific one?". "Is SETI science?" simply doesn't make sense.

I seem to be getting deja vu with this thread.

 

[Cuddles]

Thanks a lot for the answer. I´ll certainly give it a try.
When a unit is about 10-12 hours, does that mean my computer has to be on for that long time? Or, what I´d think, the work is just interupted when I shut it down and continued the next time I start it? Sorry, (technical) idiot here.

I haven't used it for a while, but it always used to be the latter.

 

[Eskarina]

Thanks a lot for the answer. I´ll certainly give it a try.
When a unit is about 10-12 hours, does that mean my computer has to be on for that long time? Or, what I´d think, the work is just interupted when I shut it down and continued the next time I start it? Sorry, (technical) idiot here.

The work is interrupted when you shut down the computer and is resumed when you fire it up again, so you're not losing any units.

 

[AWPrime]

Is SETI science? How could you prove that there was no life in the Galaxy (other than our own) that sends out radio waves? If you cannot, then SETI could go on forever.

Well it is based on some shaky assumptions. One for instance is that intelligent life will create civilizations. And that advanced civilizations will use radio.

 

[Georg]

I haven't used it for a while, but it always used to be the latter.

The work is interrupted when you shut down the computer and is resumed when you fire it up again, so you're not losing any units.

Thank both of you. I´ll put it on my computer the next rainy weekend.

 

[rjh01]

<snip> The question you need to ask is "Is the hypothesis that there is/is not extraterristrial life a scientific one?". "Is SETI science?" simply doesn't make sense.
<snip>

The problem is that it is almost impossible to prove false to the idea that there is advanced life on other planets. So SETI can go on forever searching. That is not good science.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I don't see the point of the question. So what if it's not "good science" as it is defined? It's an attempt at discovery. If they succeed, then the science can take place. If they continue to fail, big deal. Nobody is coming to any conclusions based on that (i.e. nobody, of any worth as far as I know, is trying to say there is no alien life because SETI hasn't found anything).

 

[The Atheist]

Well it is based on some shaky assumptions. One for instance is that intelligent life will create civilizations. And that advanced civilizations will use radio.

I hadn't seen this thread, but it goes well with the Fermi thread, where I actually commented that SETI is one of the biggest con-jobs ever - and apparently in the name of [some very dodgy] science.

Looks like the reasons noted so far cover the reasons why I'm against so many resources being wasted on it.

 

[shadron]

I hadn't seen this thread, but it goes well with the Fermi thread, where I actually commented that SETI is one of the biggest con-jobs ever - and apparently in the name of [some very dodgy] science.

Looks like the reasons noted so far cover the reasons why I'm against so many resources being wasted on it.

Ummmmm, actually you didn't say anything about SETI, per se, except as an aside. Mainly Frank Drake was the target of your pithery.

And how many wasted resources would you say that is? More than, say, botox treatments? or government solar power research? or, perhaps, more than the amount of federal funds wasted by the state of North Carolina in the building of I-735 when they ignored the engineers reports and decided to use a thin pavement cap on the Interstate HighwayInterstate 795 (North Carolina)^WP)? (Sorry, couldn't find anything in your kingdom to rail about - have to supply your own, I guess.)

 

[The Atheist]

Ummmmm, actually you didn't say anything about SETI, per se, except as an aside. Mainly Frank Drake was the target of your pithery.

I said I thought I might start a thread on the subject, but it seems there's already one on SETI, so it looked a good place to start.

And how many wasted resources would you say that is? More than, say, botox treatments? or government solar power research? or, perhaps, more than the amount of federal funds wasted by the state of North Carolina in the building of I-735 when they ignored the engineers reports and decided to use a thin pavement cap on the Interstate HighwayInterstate 795 (North Carolina)^WP)? (Sorry, couldn't find anything in your kingdom to rail about - have to supply your own, I guess.)

More than all of those things, none of which is really comparable - botox at least has a cosmetic effect.

 

[Georg]

I hadn't seen this thread, but it goes well with the Fermi thread, where I actually commented that SETI is one of the biggest con-jobs ever - and apparently in the name of [some very dodgy] science.

Looks like the reasons noted so far cover the reasons why I'm against so many resources being wasted on it.

Who exactly is being conned, and what many resources are wasted?
I´d not be in favour for it if being largely government funded, because, as said before, I agree that there are more urgent problems to solve with tax money.
But what is wrong if people donate or run the programme on their computers if they are interested?
I think that a couple of bucks for higher electricity costs are absolutely O.K. to help me dealing with my curiosity, and that it is a better way to spend that small amount of money than to drink the eighth bottle of beer on a boring evening.
I´m not as naive as to really count on "something" being discovered, I see it more as a form of entertainment including a very very very small chance that something interesting will be the result. Maybe comparable to playing Lotto for a small amount, not as an investment, but for fun and for being able to dream a bit more realistically than without playing (worked out for me once, btw., not a real lot of money, but a couple of thousands, nice enough).
What´s actually wrong with that?

 

[AWPrime]

So SETI could be considered to be a hobby.

 

[Georg]

So SETI could be considered to be a hobby.

Hypothesized that a great majority of experts says that indeed every public dollar on the programme would be wasted (I don´t know, if that is the case) because definite results are most unlikely, then "a hobby" would be an accurate term, yes.

 

[The Atheist]

But what is wrong if people donate or run the programme on their computers if they are interested?

Nothing wrong with it at all - people are welcome to waste their own money any way they like.

I´m not as naive as to really count on "something" being discovered, I see it more as a form of entertainment including a very very very small chance that something interesting will be the result. Maybe comparable to playing Lotto for a small amount, not as an investment, but for fun and for being able to dream a bit more realistically than without playing (worked out for me once, btw., not a real lot of money, but a couple of thousands, nice enough).

That's perfectly reasonable. I guess it seems too much like tithing to me.

 

[Georg]

Nothing wrong with it at all - people are welcome to waste their own money any way they like.

I do not necessarily see it as a waste, but in principle that´s the angle where I´m coming from. And since running it on my computer will not cost me a fortune, (at least I hope so, just installed it today), I don´t care too much.

That's perfectly reasonable. I guess it seems too much like tithing to me.

A bit of a difference for me.

Churches:

Make promises and surely don´t deliver (afterlife etc.).

Where I live, you have to pay a certain amount of your income if you are a member (catholics, lutherians, some others), no choice. If you are not a member, no service.

You have to have blind faith, otherwise it even makes less sense than it does anyway.

SETI:

Makes no promises but might deliver (at least possible in principle).

Donations or running it on your computer is voluntary, the possible results would be for everyone.

No faith required, hope is sufficient.