Thread replies: 13
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Anonymous
How to find intelligent life. 2016-10-23 22:51:00 Post No. 8433100
[Report] Image search: [Google]
How to find intelligent life. 2016-10-23 22:51:00 Post No. 8433100
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: maxresdefault.jpg (173KB, 1920x1080px) Image search:
[Google]
173KB, 1920x1080px
If intelligent life exists, we can find it, and obtain all of their knowledge, within our lifetimes. Here's how:
>There are ~400 Billion stars in our own Galaxy.
>If we screen each star solar system for 60 seconds looking for non-random radio signals, that would take 761,035 years (= 60s X 400 Billion) to perform the screen.
>So, we could screen every star solar system in our galaxy for intelligent life in one year using 761,035 radio telescopes.
>If you mass produce the radio telescopes, achieving economy of scale, you should be able to produce each radio telescope for ~$10,000, plus or minus an order of magnitude.
>So, it would cost between $0.7 Billion and $70 Billion dollars to build the 761,035 radio telescopes; a cheap price to pay for all of the knowledge from a more intelligent life form.
>For reference, the US annual defense budget is >$600 Billion. NASA's annual budget is ~$18 Billion. NIH's annual budget is ~$31 Billion. So, $70 Billion is well within the US's capabilities.
>After the initial screen is done, and after filtering out the false-positives, you can then begin trying to decode their message(s).
>If this effort fails to find intelligent life, then it would be safe to say that we won't find a more intelligent lifeform in our universe before our species dies off. There may be other galaxies within communicable distance that we could look at, but their relatively low numbers only increase the chances of finding intelligent life by an order of magnitude of ~3. Simply put, if you don't find intelligent life in your own galaxy, which has ~400 Billion stars, you're almost guaranteed to not find intelligent life in the relatively few other galaxies within communicable distance.
Here is how you can help; tell your senators and representatives to create a budget for performing a serious coordinated effort for finding intelligent life.
>>
I've figured out how to find intelligent life.
>If there is intelligent life then they have discovered the Internet
>Release a press release on the internet
>wait for ayy lmaos to respond
>>
>>8433100
>761,035 radio telescopes
>assuming $10,000 per unit
Congrats, you made me reply.
>>
>>8433105
what's materially wrong with the argument?
Simply put, no matter how you look at it, we can screen our entire galaxy for intelligent life within our lifetime for ~$70 Billion dollars. Whether it takes one year, or ten years, or costs $100K per telescope, it is still a viable argument.
>>
>>8433100
dude, you can barely find intelligent life on Earth and you are talking space?
>>
>>8433100
What's the point? Let's say we find a radio signal from ayy imaos. It was probably a signal sent from thousands of years ago, depending on the distance of course. If we were to send a message the second we recived it, it would still not be received by intelligent life for thousands of years, again depending on the distance. Basically we are fucked, unless there's a way to send messages through bent space time.
>>
>>8433615
The idea is that they would be smart enough to constantly stream their encyclopedia of info, thus negating a need for us to communicate back.
>>
>>8433100
There's thousands of things like this that the government could just decide to drop billions of dollars on and easily succeed. The problem is that there's thousands of these things, and we can't fit even one of them into the already bursting budget. Taking billions out of one thing means a lot of people who want funds for their particular thing, just like you want for your intelligent life project, would not be able to do their particular thing, and their thing might be much more important than yours (like say, curing cancer). You also forget that there's going to be a lot of other factors besides the cost of the telescopes. How about the massive amounts of materials (not simply the material costs, but the obtainability)? How about the room all of these telescopes take up? How about the production costs, not just of one telescope but of all of the overhead (building factories, employees, etc.)? Your plan is incomplete and impractical. I would much rather put 70 billion into other NASA projects or curing cancer.
>>
>>8433746
If we can build cars for less than $100,000, then we can certainly build simple radio telescopes for less than $100,000. Cars are far more complicated than radio telescopes and cars also require far more diverse manufacturing infrastructure.
The radio telescopes would be setup in the empty deserts in the west of the US; plenty of room.
Spending $70 Billion would increase the federal budget by ~1.8% for one year. Not bad considering the potential upside.
>>
>>8433100
Let's say we find 'life on another planet.'
First thing that happens is the pentagon shoots a fuck ton of nukes at it... see the problem?
>>
>>8433685
only if they, like invented a wikipedia and want to share it, and have a government prepared to deal with aliens
>>
>>8433746
>and we can't fit even one of them into the already bursting budget
you seem to not really understand much of anything.
there's plenty of money. it's just that the money is being frozen by the party of "No".
Thread posts: 13
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1