Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Submission + - Aguments for the regualtion of SETI, and METI (Messaging ETI).

RockDoctor writes: John Gertz has been "an active leader in the field of SETI" for many years at the SETI Institute and Foundation for Investment in Research on SETI.

He makes some sober, and frankly dull points on the legal/ policy front ( though the prospect of "the Aliens" having First Contact with ISIS or Kim Jong Un is ... unsettling). However, he also discusses more interesting options.

This author has argued elsewhere that the artificial signal that we first detect may more likely derive from within our own Solar System than from a source outside of it.

Hows that?

Given the widespread of times and possible locations of the origin of life, Gertz thinks that it is plausible that an ETI seeded the galaxy with passive probes that would wait (in shelter) for development of (technological) life within their area, and then initiate communications. If, for our putative ETs, interstellar travel proved impossible for some reason, they might at least have contact with later intelligences by scattering probes around the galaxy which every so-often would "wake up", sample their area for interesting signals, and go back to sleep again for a few generations.

All very "Monolith" (Arthur C. Clarke SF story, later made into several films). But what if a probe hibernating around Sedna were to wake up to I love Lucy? It's response (indeed, it's body) could on the way today, and arrive next week at a DPRK listening post — who choose to reply in secret. To what effect? What could the nuclear power of DPRK do with an alien version of Encyclopedia Galactica 54321 — in comparison to our Encyclopedia 2000?

Gertz raises some probably important policy points, but some really fascinating ideas.

Comment Re:Some how 'preparing' doesn't seem like the righ (Score 1) 136

I hav a mental image.

Co-Pilot to ATC : "One of our pilots is missing!"
ATC to Co-Pilot : "Good film but what's your message?"

Co-Pilot to ATC : "Also, one of our wings is missing, and half of the fuselage. We were flying over Katla."
ATC to Co-Pilot : "Thanks for the warning. We'll try to find your bodies when it's all over."

Comment Re:Some how 'preparing' doesn't seem like the righ (Score 1) 136

And she tends to have explosive eruptions.

So, a more derived (higher silica/ more viscous) magma, most likely. Implying a larger upper-crustal (5-15km depth) magma chamber for differentiation than for the other volcanoes. Interesting.

I'll keep on watching the earthquake reports. And I'll try to get the ö in jökullhlaup right more often until you get your thorn and I can type ÐÐÐÐ (Cyrillic, like :paka") without problems.

Comment Re:Ummm (Score 1) 147

Stonehenge == hanging/suspended stone

This is wrong.

"henge" = circular earthworks.

Stonehenge = circular earthworks with stones.

Later, when the distinction between defensive earthworks and non-defensive ones was recognised, the defensive ones were called "hill forts" (because they were mostly sited on the tops of hills) while the harder-to-understand non-defensive structures which were not on hills were called "henges".

Comment Re:Stonehenge, without the stones? (Score 1) 147

the temples of Angkor Wat were shown to have correspondence with the constellation of Draco.

Since we know the construction date of Angkor Wat fairly well (1113 to 1175 for most of the buildings), this would predict that the constellations of the time recognised by the people of the time in the area included something substantially resembling what we call "Draco".

Oh it's a Graham Hancock book-selling idea. Enough said. Bring something useful to the table.

Comment Re:Stonehenge, without the stones? (Score 1) 147

But so far there is no evidence there was a stone structures, especially the classic a lintel propped up on top of two stone pillars is not found.

Your "classic lintel structure" is present at approximately 0.1% of the megalithic sites in Britain, and probably lower in Europe as a whole. It is in fact an extremely rare construct.

Comment Re:"pristine' rainforest celebrated by ecologists" (Score 1) 147

But because the FA does not define what was "the area" they surveyed, it's difficult to discuss this...

Read the fucking paper , not the fucking cited articles, which are crap (as per normal). Page 2, the section entitled "study area" and Figure 1 (A, B, and C) on page 3.

Comment Re:Only the earthworks are visible (Score 1) 147

This hypothesis predicts the presence of substantial post holes at (calculable) intervals around the inner edge of the ditch, far enough in that the spreading loads of the weight of the structure didn't push the poles radially into the ditch. (Remember "henge" = bank outside ditch ; "fortification" = bank inside ditch ; these are henges.)

I predict that any post holes found will be nearly vertical and not at an angle that would close the roof in the necessary radius given the canopy hight in nearby undisturbed forest.

When the sites are put to the spade, we'll find out who is right. I'd put my money on me, unsurprisingly.

Slashdot Top Deals

Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein