• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

A Signal from Proxima Centauri?

DBT

Contributor
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
14,785
Location
ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
Place your bets, alien signal from Proxima or satellite?

''Now, speaking to Scientific American, the scientists behind the discovery caution there is still much work to be done, but admit the interest is justified. “It has some particular properties that caused it to pass many of our checks, and we cannot yet explain it,” says Andrew Siemion from the University of California, Berkeley.

Most curiously, it occupies a very narrow band of the radio spectrum: 982 megahertz, specifically, which is a region typically bereft of transmissions from human-made satellites and spacecraft. “We don’t know of any natural way to compress electromagnetic energy into a single bin in frequency” such as this one, Siemion says. Perhaps, he says, some as-yet-unknown exotic quirk of plasma physics could be a natural explanation for the tantalizingly concentrated radio waves. But “for the moment, the only source that we know of is technological.”



''To begin, the signal apparently varies slightly in frequency, wobbling up and down the radio dial. So it’s not coming from an antenna bolted to the ground here on Earth. That immediately makes it non-terrestrial by definition, but still doesn’t certify it as alien.

Indeed, it just might be a telemetry signal from an orbiting satellite. The orbital motion of these satellites cause their transmissions to rise and fall in frequency, after all. And while you might think that the chances of accidentally tuning in a satellite are not great, you should think again.''

Yet another participant in this lineup is the possibility that what’s been found are merely natural radio emissions from a world having a strong magnetic field. In our own solar system, Jupiter’s noisy radio bursts have been studied for many decades. Maybe there’s such a beefy, magnetically laced planet orbiting Proxima Centauri?

That may seem plausible, but if you were to transport Jupiter to the distance of Proxima, its cacophonous outbursts would be roughly a thousand times weaker than the faintest signal our radio telescopes can detect. In other words, this explanation for the detection depends on there being an extraordinarily noisy world orbiting Proxima Centauri. Not impossible, but a bit unlikely.

Of course, there’s always the possibility that the signal is really, really local. A microwave oven in the break room of the Parkes radio telescope caused considerable consternation five years ago when it produced signals that, at first, suggested that something remarkable was happening in the distant cosmos. In fact, it was just someone heating up lunch.

So, given even this short laundry list, we see that there are several possible explanations for the signal that are, regrettably, rather prosaic. Yes, as long as we still don’t know, we should continue to consider the alien hypothesis viable. After all, any SETI detection is going to be dicey when we first make it … there will be plenty of calls for restraint intended to pacify the all-too-eager. But it’s reasonable to expect that someday one of these suspicious signals will, indeed, be the sought-after proof of intelligence on another world.''
 
Without reading original link, is not most of your explanations can be excluded simply by measuring direction to the signal using two spaced far apart antennas? I mean come on, microwave ovens?
 
Without reading original link, is not most of your explanations can be excluded simply by measuring direction to the signal using two spaced far apart antennas? I mean come on, microwave ovens?

Some of the wording does seem odd, perhaps just cautious rhetoric?
 
OK, I scanned it a little. It's another one time event in archive, they can not confirm it with another observation. Very convenient for producing noise in the press.
My bet it's a satellite, like most previous cases. And again, their insistence on using single telescope is annoying, easiest way to exclude close sources (satellites included) is to have more than one telescope looking into the same direction.
 
The signal appeared to persist for some time:

''Breakthrough Listen uses a technique called “nodding,” where the telescope will spend a period of time looking at a target and then an equivalent period looking elsewhere in the sky, to check that any potential signal is truly coming from the target and not, say, someone microwaving their lunch in an observatory’s cafeteria. “In five of the 30-minute observations over about three hours we see this thing come back,” Sheikh says, a hint that the signal indeed originated from Proxima Centauri—or some other deep-space source in that part of the sky—before making its way to Earth.''


''Researcher Andrew Siemion from the University of California, Berkeley has said that the signal has properties that have caused it to pass many checks so far, and it can’t be explained. One of the most curious aspects of the signal is that it occupies an extremely narrow radio spectrum of 982 megahertz. That is a spectral range that is typically empty of any transmissions from human-made satellites and spacecraft''
 
DBT, "nodding" does not exclude satellites.

I didn't say it does. I merely presented the story as it stands. I have no belief in the matter. As the researchers say, it's likely to be something mundane.

But then, there is a small possibility that it could be something extraordinary. Let your imagination run wild for a while. ;)
 
DBT, "nodding" does not exclude satellites.

Why would nodding not rule out a satellite?


Some satellites are geosynchronous.

But those move relative to the sky. If a telescope is tracking an object with fixed celestial coordinates, like a star, then the geo satellites are not stationary. Also, even if somehow a satellite were fixed in celestial coordinates nodding moves away from that pointing to another direction entirely, that’s the point of it.
 
It seems an odd way to communicate. Except perhaps mathematics, It may not be possible to communcate with a truly alien species.
 
It seems an odd way to communicate. Except perhaps mathematics, It may not be possible to communcate with a truly alien species.
I agree, odd. If the object was to announce our presence as an intelligent species, why send a coded message rather than just a sequence of one to ten bits? This signal was a string of 1679 bits that requires decoding to determine it means anything. It has to assume that who/what ever received it understood that it was an image, what a raster scan is, that it was 73 scan lines of 23 characters each, plus there was a hell of a lot of information that would have to be decoded if they did figure out it was a raster scan image.

As an example of how difficult this would be to understand, the string of bits was shown to several scholars not associated with the project and none of them could make any sense of it... and they were humans.

But then I guess it doesn't really matter since it won't be able to be received by any possible intelligence for another 25,000 years as it was directed at the star cluster M13. However it was a clever way for SETI to solicit donations, as donors were probably the real target.
 
Some satellites are geosynchronous.

But those move relative to the sky. If a telescope is tracking an object with fixed celestial coordinates, like a star, then the geo satellites are not stationary. Also, even if somehow a satellite were fixed in celestial coordinates nodding moves away from that pointing to another direction entirely, that’s the point of it.
Radio-telescopes don't track the same point in sky for long time so incapable to detect motion. And it is hard to distinguish motion from slowly changing amplitude.
 
Some satellites are geosynchronous.

But those move relative to the sky. If a telescope is tracking an object with fixed celestial coordinates, like a star, then the geo satellites are not stationary. Also, even if somehow a satellite were fixed in celestial coordinates nodding moves away from that pointing to another direction entirely, that’s the point of it.
Radio-telescopes don't track the same point in sky for long time so incapable to detect motion. And it is hard to distinguish motion from slowly changing amplitude.

Depends which radio telescope and what it’s beam size is. The paper cited in the article says they tracked the star for 26 hours total with occasional excursions off source for the baseline. Signal went away when they were off source. I don’t see how this could be consistent with a satellite at all.
 
Radio-telescopes don't track the same point in sky for long time so incapable to detect motion. And it is hard to distinguish motion from slowly changing amplitude.

Depends which radio telescope and what it’s beam size is. The paper cited in the article says they tracked the star for 26 hours total with occasional excursions off source for the baseline. Signal went away when they were off source. I don’t see how this could be consistent with a satellite at all.
That's inconsistent with their claims.
Obviously, they have not had 26 hours of continuous signal, otherwise they would have excluded earth satellites.
Then there are probes which are far beyond earth orbit. They can linger in the same point in sky for much longer.
These are usually in ecliptic plane and can be excluded for most directions including Proxima Centauri.
Also, elaborate prank would be hard to exclude. But again, they said themselves they did not exclude satellite.

Right way to search for aliens is to have two or more telescopes separated by large distance looking in the same direction of sky. Plus real time data on all satellites/probes and airplanes. and antenna array which records signals around antenna to exclude pranksters.

And forgot, change all passwords from "12345" to something less obvious.
 
Apparently there is ''still much work to be done.''

From the first article:

''..the scientists behind the discovery caution there is still much work to be done, but admit the interest is justified. “It has some particular properties that caused it to pass many of our checks, and we cannot yet explain it,” says Andrew Siemion from the University of California, Berkeley.''
 
Apparently there is ''still much work to be done.''

From the first article:

''..the scientists behind the discovery caution there is still much work to be done, but admit the interest is justified. “It has some particular properties that caused it to pass many of our checks, and we cannot yet explain it,” says Andrew Siemion from the University of California, Berkeley.''
There is no such thing as bad publicity. I am not accusing them but that's a reality, poorly conducted experiment which generate some noise has a better chance of getting funded.
 
What the article says is this:

“In five of the 30-minute observations over about three hours we see this thing come back,”

So they had at least three hours of observations during which nodding away made the signal go away and coming back it returned. In three hours a star will cover a lot of sky.
 
Back
Top Bottom