Is SETI worth it?

[Polux]

I'm one of those who think that we're probably not alone, as I voted in the other poll, but I've been growing more and more skeptical about the SETI project.
I assume their methods are OK; I just think it is highly unlikely that we will find anything that way, or any other way for the matter. Then I consider it to be a huge waste of time and resources.
Of course, nobody knows whether anything will be found, but still, I'm asking if you think it's worth it.
I both think that there's probably life out there, and that we'll never get in touch. Unless there's something to find in our own solar system (hardly intelligent life forms...).

 

[Ratman_tf]

I voted yes. SETI costs less to run in a year than Americans spend on fast food.

http://www.seti.org/about_us/faq.html

 

[Marian]

Well since 1994 (per Seti's site) it's been completely funded by private donations (a fact I wasn't aware of actually). I could comment that it's a better use for money than numerous other things, but that doesn't REALLY address the question.

Is SETI worth it? Yeah. I'd have to answer yes. I'm taking into account it's private money, so we don't have to say is it a better use of the money than X...because people are choosing to toss their money specifically into SETI. There's no reasonable assumption that they'd be tossing that money to another specific cause instead.

Assuming SETI finds...nothing, is it still worth it? Sure, because finding nothing is still information. Knowledge is good. Plus there's the potential for spin-off uses of technology or information they discover. I don't know if any has happened yet, but I know that NASA has 'paid' for itself numerous times over JUST in spin-offs that benefit humanity. So any spinoff benefits are a clear win.

Assuming SETI finds...something, is it still worth it? We may not be able to do anything with that information at this point in time. But the discovery alone would be worth it.

Astronomers learned much by looking at the heavens and asking questions, and things they learned have applications beyond pure discovery. Whether or not that is or will be the case with SETI, I don't know, but it seems a worthwhile private endeavor.

 

[Polux]

Assuming SETI finds...nothing, is it still worth it? Sure, because finding nothing is still information. Knowledge is good.

True, but in my opinion this information would not be of great value, thus not worth the effort (since I consider it most likely that SETI will find nothing).
Basically what we would learn is that if there's other intelligent life, it is awfully hard to find.

Assuming SETI finds...something, is it still worth it? We may not be able to do anything with that information at this point in time. But the discovery alone would be worth it.

Absolutely... if something is ever found, I will admit that it was worth it after all. I just think it too unlikely to bother.

Perhaps I should have asked differently: Would you put your own money on SETI? Or, do you think SETI will ever find something? This sounds more like what I was thinking when I created the poll. Because, as you say, the project might be worth it for other reasons, and I would have preferred to leave those other reasons out of the question. Too late for that now!

 

[Dancing David]

Given how little is costs to piggy back SETI, why not, we spend lots of money all the time on potentialy worthless research. The payoff is more or a spiritual one than any thing else.
I let my computer chrunch numbers for SETI@home.

THink of the money people give to the church, there is still no proof of god.

 

[Batman Jr.]

They do make the assumption that intelligent aliens will use radio waves for communication. It's even fallacious to say that if they're using another kind of technology, then it follows that they at one time used radio communication as it is the most primitive form of wireless communication. This sentiment posits that an alien's grasp of logical/mathematical constructs is similar or the same to that of a human's. A different kind of mind may find it easier to foment a technology that we would consider more complex and more arduous a task to foment a technology we would consider simpler. Even restricting our musings to the human race, we can see this principle illustrated quite vividly in autistic-savants.

 

[Marian]

Perhaps I should have asked differently: Would you put your own money on SETI? Or, do you think SETI will ever find something? This sounds more like what I was thinking when I created the poll. Because, as you say, the project might be worth it for other reasons, and I would have preferred to leave those other reasons out of the question. Too late for that now!

Ooo yeah different question. Tough one too. If like I could designate the $3 to go to SETI or the presidental campaign...I'd pick SETI.

Or if SETI was going to shut down due to lack of funds and my tossing $5 in would help...I'd toss in $5.

But I don't currently financially support SETI. I do have a charity I donate to specifically (and have asked others to donate to specifically) that I personally and selfishly find more important to me.

Just as I'm sure if someone was making a choice between AIDS research or cancer research and SETI...the first two would generally win. So it's still kinda a tough question. Because between SETI and a big mac, SETI wins.

As far as if I think SETI will ever find something...I really don't know. If I HAD to answer only yes or no, I'd answer yes. Not because I believe they'll find evidence of E.T.L. necessarily, but that they'll find SOMETHING of value to be more likely (just purely in opinion) than NOTHING of value. Just the search itself is of value, because I believe exploration is in many ways essential to our nature. Wanting to know what lies over the next hill is a part of the human condition, I think.

Still doesn't give you a clear answer. But if you asked 'If SETI doesn't find any evidence of E.T. presence/life...was it a waste' I'd answer no. Because I don't believe because an experiment fails that it's necessarily wasteful. And in this situation that conclusion would still be of value (especially if new/better technology develops) as well as any potential spin-offs.

But the short answer would be: I believe SETI to be of value, merely because of its mission regardless of what it does/doesn't find. (And because it's a scientific mission, I wouldn't believe it had the same value if, for example, they were paying people to hum 'OM' to 'reach E.T.s')

 

[CurtC]

Y'know, if a time traveller came to me and informed me that tomorrow, either a) SETI will find a signal from an alien race, or b) that God will part the clouds and announce to CurtC that he does, in fact, exist, I would place my wager with b). And that's saying something.

 

[scotth]

True, but in my opinion this information would not be of great value, thus not worth the effort (since I consider it most likely that SETI will find nothing).
Basically what we would learn is that if there's other intelligent life, it is awfully hard to find.

If we do a pretty exhaustive search, and we find nothing at all.... that is pretty interesting information to me. It gives at some idea of the potential rarity of intelligence life in the universe, or at least our galaxy. Making any kind of contact with a civilization in even the nearest galaxy besides our own just about defies contemplation.

If we can develop the capabilities to detect just the radio leakage from a world only as developed as ours is today, i.e. not a deliberate transmission to us, we could really get a good idea if there life is common at all. If would could detect a similar civilization to what we have to a distance of even half the radius of the Milky Way, if intelligent life is common at all, we should be able to detect some.

We're not that good yet, but we are gonna get there any faster by not practicing. They are improving the process all the time. They can analyze so many more channels of data at the same time than they could just a few years ago.

I find it worth it.

 

[Batman Jr.]

But what if it's not life that's rare; what if it’s instead radio communication?

 

[vlix]

You guys might be interested in this article:

http://www.planetary.org/html/UPDATES/seti/Contact/debate/default.html

It's a debate between Carl Sagan and Ernst Mayr, discussing the possibility of intelligent alien life and SETI's chances of success.

I for one have voted 'yes' in the poll

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Curt said:
Y'know, if a time traveller came to me and informed me that tomorrow, either a) SETI will find a signal from an alien race, or b) that God will part the clouds and announce to CurtC that he does, in fact, exist, I would place my wager with b). And that's saying something.

You would? Wow, that is saying something.

~~ Paul

 

[Rob Lister]

Right now, seti is like a blind man walking through the desert listening to each grain of sand for the sound of a sand flea. It won't always be that way. As technology improves, we'll discover more and more extra-solar planets that are in the right orbit around the right stars. These are the area's on which seti will focus. This assumes their 'listening' technology improves as well, of course.

 

[DangerousBeliefs]

Y'know, if a time traveller came to me and informed me that tomorrow, either a) SETI will find a signal from an alien race, or b) that God will part the clouds and announce to CurtC that he does, in fact, exist, I would place my wager with b). And that's saying something.

Really? Even though you know intelligent life exists but that God may not?

I would say A is 100% more likely than B, given our current level of knowledge.

 

[CurtC]

I am almost certain that life exists elsewhere. I am also almost certain that God does not exist. But it seems to me that the chance that God exists is greater than the chance that there will be intelligent life in the teeny-tiny section of the universe that we can detect with radio waves, and that this life will be at the stage in its development that it might be sending clean radio waves at high power.

So I would be more surprised about a SETI success.

 

[Dancing David]

But what if it's not life that's rare; what if it’s instead radio communication?

That is of course a very goos question, howver the anwer is simple, because we can. I suppose part of it is the assumption that aliens might act as we do, but it is also easier for us to use our technology to look for similar technology.

If another civilization uses nutrino modulation, we won't be able to detect it.

I agree however that there is a huge amont of anthropic thinking about aliens life, I doubt we could communicate even if they were close.

 

[vlix]

I am almost certain that life exists elsewhere. I am also almost certain that God does not exist. But it seems to me that the chance that God exists is greater than the chance that there will be intelligent life in the teeny-tiny section of the universe that we can detect with radio waves, and that this life will be at the stage in its development that it might be sending clean radio waves at high power.

So I would be more surprised about a SETI success.

According to some people, like Carl Sagan for example, the chances of there being intelligent life in our little corner of the universe are not that small at all. If I remember correctly (perhaps I don't), his take on the Drake Equation suggested relatively large numbers of alien civilizations in our galaxy alone, at any point in time.

 

[Rob Lister]

If another civilization uses nutrino modulation, we won't be able to detect it.

Then again, they might use telepathic communication. I'm not sure what such a discovery might mean for JREF.

If, however, they used nutrino modulation, is it not reasonable that they would have progressed to that technology through others, just as we have progressed through smoke signals to laterns, electrical, CW, AM, FM VHF, microwave and now to fiber?

The problem as I see it is that (even) we have only been visible in the radio spectrum for a hundred or so years. In another hundred or so we will likely again be invisible (assuming we don't remain technologically stagnent.

Perhaps the 'nutrino modulation' comment has more weight than its author knows.

 

[scotth]

According to some people, like Carl Sagan for example, the chances of there being intelligent life in our little corner of the universe are not that small at all. If I remember correctly (perhaps I don't), his take on the Drake Equation suggested relatively large numbers of alien civilizations in our galaxy alone, at any point in time.

There "could" be. The Drake Equation has a number of parameters that we can only guess at. But putting numbers in towards the optimistic end of reasonable does give that result.

 

[scotth]

Then again, they might use telepathic communication. I'm not sure what such a discovery might mean for JREF.

If, however, they used nutrino modulation, is it not reasonable that they would have progressed to that technology through others, just as we have progressed through smoke signals to laterns, electrical, CW, AM, FM VHF, microwave and now to fiber?

The problem as I see it is that (even) we have only been visible in the radio spectrum for a hundred or so years. In another hundred or so we will likely again be invisible (assuming we don't remain technologically stagnent.

Perhaps the 'nutrino modulation' comment has more weight than its author knows.

I would disagree, I suspect we become more and more visible in the radio spectrum as time goes on. Unless we seriously misunderstand the laws of physics, there really isn't a realistic basis for a technology that could replace it.

Communicating with space craft, airplanes, radar (weather radar if nothing else) are tasks that radio waves are perfectly suited for.