×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SETI@Home Publishes Skymap

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the long-distance-call dept.

Space 317

An anonymous reader writes "The skymap of where in the night sky to find the most promising SETI@Home signals is reported today, along with the research plan for the March Stellar Countdown project. The dedicated use of the Arecibo Telescope to revisit these spikes, pulses, and steady signals, focused on 166 star candidates. Those 166 were pruned from the five billion signals that have been found since 1999, depending on the signal's persistence, closeness to a known star, and frequency. The next step is particularly fascinating, if a signal appears to have increased since the first observation put that star on the checklist."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

317 comments

FP! (-1, Troll)

Fazer (636882) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542903)

FP!

Re:FP! (-1, Troll)

gfody (514448) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542914)

YoU fAiL iT! ..sorry, just burning karma

Re:FP! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542969)

You actually give these morons money?

MOD PARENT UP! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543015)

UP UP AND AWAY WEB!

hahaha that was from spider man! UP UP AND AWAY WEB!

Shazaam!

GO WEB GO!

FLY!

Whaaaaa HOooooooooo!!!

Re:MOD PARENT UP! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543044)

It's Saturday night, and the drunken trolls are out in force on Slashdot!

151
69
420
42
65536

I HATE BINARY! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543052)

NO TEXT! SUCKER!

[,/] Post Anonymously

[Submit] [Preview]

FP (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542907)

BOOYA!!!

Should we be concerned... (4, Interesting)

bc90021 (43730) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542908)

...that even alien signals so nicely fit a bell curve? Does this mean the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence will be largely disappointing? ;)

Re:Should we be concerned... (1)

gfody (514448) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542934)

the signals are not sent that way, its a side effect of the scanning beam.

Re:Should we be concerned... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542952)

Just as they would, when they find us...

Re:Should we be concerned... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542988)

I'd like to point out that it's the green/orange squares that are candidate systems. The blue bell curve is the Milky Way distorted because it's an inverse sphere laid onto a square.

Re:Should we be concerned... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543000)

You dopey fuck. You're the basic slashdot reader - don't actually know anything so why bother asking questions? It's like you're trying to act like you're aware of the subject, but in reality, barely know anything. Go back to burger flipping. You dumb fuck.

Re:Should we be concerned... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543084)

actually the "bell curve" effect is the effect of the "plane" of the milky way intersecting with a cylinder (distorted on either end in this projection). The cylinder is "unwrapped" , thus the plane appears as a sinusoid due to the intersection angle of the galactic plane.

It is also interesting that the radio telscope can only tract objects in a band across the sky, due to physical limitations of a ground based radio telescope. This "can" mean that there are as many as ~4 times as many potential signals out there (since they don't line up with the galactic plane we can assume they are nearby star systems which are scattered about the plane).

"Star candidates"? (2, Funny)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542913)

Sounds more like it's involved with a new crap reality show than SETI@Home.

Re:"Star candidates"? (5, Funny)

mbadolato (105588) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542929)

Or combine them! Each week we get to vote a new race out of the universe, and at the end, the final two races get married.

And here's the surprise: the newlywed alien couple will have Disaster Area play at their wedding, and be given their own Heart of Gold Spaceship as a wedding present!!

Re:"Star candidates"? (1)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542932)

Disaster Area? Hell no! They get Al Gore's Tony-nominated karaoke rendition of "Born to Run."

out of money (0, Funny)

X00M (526040) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542916)

I thought that seti@home went bankrupt awhile back...? Maybe not x00m

I AM BARRY BONDS! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542918)

Suck my huge black cock or I'm going to hit you with my bat.

SETI... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542920)

...is totally gay

Um, excuse me, but... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542925)

.
Excuse me, but has Seti found any signs of intelligent life out there? No?

So, why are they advising us where we should look?

Proximity to a star? (1, Insightful)

anthonyrcalgary (622205) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542926)

How can they be sure aliens will live close to a star?

Re:Proximity to a star? (5, Insightful)

anakin357 (69114) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542944)

The likelyhood of aliens living near a star is probably based on the idea that most lifeforms are somewhat similar to ourselves, and need light/heat from a star to survive.

--
If we find aliens I hope they like beer.

Re:Proximity to a star? (5, Insightful)

AceCaseOR (594637) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543101)

Well... we're far more likely to find an extra-terrestrial settlement on a planet where it'll still be there (in theory) each time we check, then trying to look for the Battlestar Galactica or the Katana Fleet or whatever.

Re:Proximity to a star? (2, Funny)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542956)

It would have to be some form of heat source, capable of producing an immense form of heat. And since Richard Simmons in spandex would take years to get that far, stars will have to do.

Re:Proximity to a star? (1)

Exitthree (646294) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543077)

Did you just say Richard Simmons is hot? Anything else you'd like to share with us? ;)

Re:Proximity to a star? (5, Insightful)

Ptahian (113302) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542971)

Because it's more likely than aliens living in the nothingness between stars (a vacuum near absolute zero where atoms per square mile are counted on one hand). Just my guess.

It's not impossible for something we're only guessing about in the first place, but unlikely given what we believe to be true.

-ptah

Re:Proximity to a star? (5, Interesting)

MuParadigm (687680) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543034)

They're assuming that any species capable of producing a radio signal has evolved on in an environment capable of providing the tools to do so. That pretty much leaves: planets.

Planets, as far our theories go, are generally formed during the creation of stars and seem to generally be captured in orbit around stars. (Of course, I doubt anyone has made a wide search for planets not close to stars.)

Thus, to look for life, look near stars.

To be able to name the aliens! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543049)

What's more sexy: Aldebaranis, Altairans, or "Vacuumers"?

Doppler Drift Rate "chirping" seems way redundant (5, Interesting)

js7a (579872) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542953)

the SETI@home screensaver analyzes the data many times over trying a great variety of possible doppler accelerations. Actually, the screensaver first takes the raw data and mathematically "undoes" a specific doppler acceleration or "chirp". It then feeds the resulting "de-accelerated" data to the FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) routines. This is called "De-chirping" the data. SETI@home tries to do this at many points between -50 Hz/sec to +50 Hz/sec. At the finest frequency resolution of 0.075 Hz we check for 5409 different chirp rates between -10 Hz/sec and +10 Hz/sec!

-- "About the SETI@Home screensaver [berkeley.edu]

That seems horribly inefficient!

Have the SETI people ever heard of cepstral [shef.ac.uk] techniques [libinst.com]?

There should be no need to iterate thousands of times over the pattern recognition algorithms when you can just take anouther FFT of the log magnitude spectrum to eliminate doppler shift (the same as what audio engineers would call 'pitch.') Cepstral analysis has been eliminating pitch in audio signal processing for decades. Too bad nobody told the astronomers.

What a waste of all those CPU cycles!

Re:Doppler Drift Rate "chirping" seems way redunda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542983)

That seems horribly inefficient!

Well, hopefully, IPv6 will alleviate some of these problems!

Re:Doppler Drift Rate "chirping" seems way redunda (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542986)

They refuse to make any optimization to the original program. Note the lack of even SSE support after all these years.

Re:Doppler Drift Rate "chirping" seems way redunda (2, Interesting)

js7a (579872) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543088)

Intel's SSE is a four float SIMD operation, and isn't avalable on all processors.

If they were using the cepstrum to correct for doppler shift, they could get several thousand times speedup; much more than just four.

Re:Doppler Drift Rate "chirping" seems way redunda (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543113)

They refuse to make ANY updates to the original client (written for 386) because they feel it will somehow invalidate all of the previous data.

Re:Doppler Drift Rate "chirping" seems way redunda (2, Interesting)

BWJones (18351) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543129)

That seems horribly inefficient!

I was under the impression that this had more to do with redundancy of complex data for purposes of security to ensure someone does not spoof data? If the analysis were to proceed by simply taking a derivative of the FFT and using that, the data would concievably be easier to forge? Perhaps this also is one of the reasons that the Seti@home crew is unwilling to make platform specific optimizations?

I have contributed.. (4, Funny)

Frank of Earth (126705) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542957)

.. about 14000 hours for the past.. 6-7 years.

And to think my computer use to just fly toasters when it was idle.

Will governments allow news to come out? (5, Interesting)

civilengineer (669209) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542958)

Supposing SETI finds something, will the government let out the news to the general public? What about all the historical cases of UFO sightings? Apart from constantly gazing at skies, should we also not try to demand opening up of all classified government documents about any possible UFO sighting?

Re:Will governments allow news to come out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542974)

Umm the government would likely find out at the same time as the rest of us, right?

Re:Will governments allow news to come out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543061)

We (people) wont find out at the same time as far as I know. First the scientists will report any possible success to government officials and ask for permission to realease the information. I guess there will be a thousand laws prohibiting the scientists from going out with the news on their own by now.

Re:Will governments allow news to come out? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542996)

Yes, aliens have traveled 150 light-years in craft the size of a prison cell and they can't avoid being caught on video by a species barely evolved from apes. That seems perfectly logical, doesn't it?

Re: Will governments allow news to come out? (4, Interesting)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543110)


> Supposing SETI finds something, will the government let out the news to the general public?

Why would governments keep it secret when they could instead use it as a long-distance boogieman to justify increasing defense spending and cracking down on civil liberties?

What a waste (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542959)

How much time are they going to waste with this? Do something useful and run Folding@Home instead.

They won't find anything... (4, Insightful)

sllim (95682) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542972)

But there really isn't anything wrong with trying.
Besides, Seti@home really helped to bring about this idea of 'distributed computing' to the world. And for the science in that end of the project I would be hard pressed to say this project isn't already a success.

But the more I think about it the more I think that radio signals are not the way we are going to find intelligent beings.
For one I question if we are capable of picking up the radio signals we are sending out.
If there was an earth, a duplicate of us, technologicaly, socialy and so forth, say 10 light years away, do we have the ability to pick up it's radio signals?

And for that matter we have had radio for a very short time, just over 100 years. And our use of it is on the way out already. In another 100 years we will probably be producing a fraction of the radio waves we produce now.

Any way you look at it the odds are stacked against Seti@home.

But I still congratulate them on giving us geeks something to talk about.

SETI was not the first distributed project (3, Interesting)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543002)

But there really isn't anything wrong with trying.

Except that it'd be pointless, even if they did get a signal. It'd be a signal hundreds or thousands of years old.

Besides, Seti@home really helped to bring about this idea of 'distributed computing' to the world.

Pardon the pun, but what planet are you from? SETI was NOT the first, Distributed.net's RC5 challenge significantly predates the SETI@home client and was enormously popular. At least Distributed.net's ruler thing will be USEFUL.

Oh, and interesting to note that when SETI@home first started up, they ran out of data to process. So you know what they did? They just fed the same data back to clients, over and over and over again, without telling people- acting like they still had new data to process. A lot of people were furious, when someone realized it. The SETI@home project people wasted a lot of resources(power) for the sake of avoiding embarassment. Sorry, I don't have much respect for people who pull that kind of crap.

Re:SETI was not the first distributed project (3, Insightful)

JudgeFurious (455868) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543078)

Well, whether or not the signal was hundreds of thousands of years old or from 15 minutes ago I can hardly imagine it being described as pointless. Evidence of life somewhere other than here, get that through your head. It would be nice to know that something else is going on out there or at the very least has gone on out there.

SETI might not be the first but it's without a doubt the most widely known. That's got to count for something doesn't it? It's advanced awareness of distributed computing far more than any other application so far (unless there's a distributed porn program running around I'm not aware of).

The list of shit people have pulled "back when they first started up" is miles long. I wouldn't have done it (re-fed the clients the same data over and over again) but it pales in comparison to some of the things that people have pulled in order to keep interest alive in their projects while they get things running smoothly.

Re:SETI was not the first distributed project (0)

sllim (95682) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543115)

Hmmm good reply.
All I was gonna say was that I knew as soon as I gave Seti@home a little bit of respect and credit some doofushead would quote some little known distributed computing project (probably an encryption breaking project) from way back when and spit on Seti.

I think your reply JudgeFurious was much better then what I was gonna right.

Re:SETI was not the first distributed project (4, Insightful)

deglr6328 (150198) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543118)

"Oh, and interesting to note that when SETI@home first started up, they ran out of data to process. So you know what they did? They just fed the same data back to clients, over and over and over again, without telling people- acting like they still had new data to process."

Hello? SETI@home is a scientific endeavour. Accuracy of results matters, and as long as hacking the client to produce false results is possible(always will be), rechecking work units for authenticity by sending them out to more than one client is necessary, duh.

OK, so kind of a troll (2, Insightful)

1984 (56406) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542973)

But, from the article:

"Following up on what is an equivalent of a million years of computation..."

When the RIAA talks about the "equivalent number of CD burners", it's a meaningless inflation. Here's another example. It would have served better to mention the number of SETI@Home clients. A true and meaningful figure which would still have conveyed the scale and a sense of awe.

God, how pedantic and picky of me.

Re:OK, so kind of a troll (0)

Aadain2001 (684036) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543038)

But they have done the equivalent of a million years of computation. They just did it in parallel :)

Re:OK, so kind of a troll (1)

MuParadigm (687680) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543074)

Not really. I thought the same thing: Millions of years of computing at what number of intructions per second? 10? 10^10? 10^100? Actually, even that wouldn't be a good measurement unless you can define the relative efficiency between instruction sets and come up with a baseline for all of them. Without defining what a "year of computation is", it's a nonsensical statistic.

Is it just me.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542976)

Or is SETI@home an example of how automation can result in inefficient and frivolous behavior? I mean, just because it's mindless and runs while you're away it's suddenly amazing and important. I'd say the the only thing amazing about it is the potential to turn millions of computers into a worldwide zombie DDoS attack.

Not that I don't think we should be exploring, but there are more inspiring frontiers to conquer than distant radio static.

Re:Is it just me.. (0, Offtopic)

Lost Penguin (636359) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543019)

Can we make it attack the RIAA... in the Real World!!! ie. Click here to slap H. Rosen ;)

SETI is a crock- here's why (-1, Troll)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542980)

You know what? These people are a disgrace. They're little more than cultists, and to quote Contact, "Yep, looking for little green men".

Here's why.

  • Chance of physically intercepting the signal is next to nothing. They don't get much radio time, and they can't cover much of the sky.
  • Now chances of actually recognizing the signal as intelligent life are unknown. They've got some great theories. Who knows if they're right?
  • Ok, maybe you see it and you recognize it. Can you decode it?
  • Alright, so who cares if you decode it, you FOUND INTELLIGENT LIFE that existed at least several hundred of years ago
  • Ok, so you send a reply. You figure out where that source planet will be when the signal finally reaches it.
  • "The aliens get it" requires the same hurdles. Mainly, they have a SETI program, they've got their ears pointed in the right direction, they identify the reply as intelligent life, etc. Hell, it assumes they haven't nuked themselves into extinction like we're on the steady path towards.
  • Now, lets say they decide to reply(ie, they're not xenophobic, they don't think it's pointless, etc). It takes another couple hundred years to get back to earth, assuming they aim right etc.
  • Now you're assuming someone here on earth actually is still listening. In a couple hundred years, is anyone going to remember SETI? We have trouble keeping languages around!
  • Great, someone's actually listening and gets the signal. You've just had the century-long equivalent of the 20 second bar conversation. "Hi". "Hi". "So, uh, send radio signals often?"

SETI people conveniently ignore almost all of these obvious problems that make the entire search pointless.

I'm NOT trolling (-1, Offtopic)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543016)

Just a shout-out to those rated my post "troll". It's NOT a troll. It's a position, justified at length- and SOME people liked it, because it did get some "interesting" mod points.

I'm not out to troll for replies. I'm out to raise the (unpopular among scifi dreamers) opinion that these people are NOT scientists working on a legitimate project.

I really get tired of moderators who "troll" opinions they don't like.

Re:I'm NOT trolling (1)

gaijin99 (143693) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543107)

I really get tired of moderators who "troll" opinions they don't like.

Agree with you here. I disagree completely with your viewpoint, so I wrote a reply. Moderating you down was uncalled for.

I will note, however, that your rather pointlessly aggressive language is doubtless what caused the people to mod you as a troll. Tossing about terms like cult and suchlike isn't really the best way to make points.

Re:SETI is a crock- here's why (3, Informative)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543025)

Alright, so who cares if you decode it, you FOUND INTELLIGENT LIFE that existed at least several hundred of years ago
Isn't that a rather important step all by itself? Just the fact of other intelligent life out there would have quite an effect regardless of what they're saying. ("LGM sks LGW 4 zads vork.")

As for the century long delay, just start talking. Wicked lag time, but eventually you'll get something said.

Re:SETI is a crock- here's why (2, Insightful)

Gherald (682277) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543031)

You make good points, but I have thought of all that before and am still interested in SETI. I guess its either natural human curiosity, or just too much Star Trek...

Re:SETI is a crock- here's why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543035)

The cost of the SETI program is well worth it if we can discover solid evidence that intelligent life exists outside the solar system.

We won't need to send signals, because we've been sending signals with the advent of the TV.

Once we have our own interplanetary travel infrastructure, then we can start thinking about actually visiting. By then humans may actually be able to make such a trip.

Re:SETI is a crock- here's why (2, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543046)

You know what? These people are a disgrace....Here's why....Now chances of actually recognizing the signal as intelligent life are unknown.

I think you answered your own criticism here. Nobody fricken knows. It is a Columbus-like exploration: sail and see what you bump into.

Ok, so you send a reply.

Who says we would send a reply? Maybe we will just listen more in and watch their version of I Love Lucy.

Re:SETI is a crock- here's why (4, Insightful)

gaijin99 (143693) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543092)

You know what? These people are a disgrace. They're little more than cultists, and to quote Contact, "Yep, looking for little green men".

Er, um, you are aware that "Contact" is a work of fiction, right?

More seriously your post seems ill thought out. Yes, the odds of finding anyting are rather slim, especially considering that our only sensors are inside the sun's area of interference. However you seem to be underestimating the importance of finding evidence of non-human sentience. Carrying on a conversation is nice, don't misunderstand me, but I'd be happy just knowing for sure that we aren't the only ones out here. Sure, the odds are that there's other people in the universe, but I'd like to know for sure.

The cost is quite low, really, and its spin off effects are already prooving to be of benefit in the short run. The truth is that "pointless" research has paid off time and again. Maybe SETI won't pay off, but the fact is that it might.

Oddly enough, you didn't mention the single biggest problem facing the SETI program: the likelyhood that use of omnidirectional radio is not long lived. Here on Earth we're already tending to move away from powerful omnidirectional signals. Increasing use of laser, microwave, fiberoptic, etc is slowly killing off true broadcast radio. Some people suspect that within another thrity years or so the only omnidirecitonal broadcasts will be quite weak and short ranged (equivalant to cordless phones).

Still, even given that, I'd say that the potential benefit of SETI vastly outweighs its miniscule cost. You've got to take chances sometimes...

And they're saying... (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542982)

"...if a signal appears to have increased since the first observation put that star on the checklist."
"stfu! Stfu! STFU!" (Of course, they're probably just getting 1970's TV by now, so I don't blame them.)

Re:And they're saying... (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543125)

What a prospect, Aliens desperately trying to ignore us as a civilisation and scramble their transmissions to sound like noise after receiving a few sitcoms from the seventies totally puts them off the idea of contacting us.

Straight Lines? (0)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542990)

At least 3 places on the map appear to have a bunch of signals that fall in a strait line. Is this some purpousful scanning pattern on Earth's part, or are there lines of UFO's up there?

Re:Straight Lines? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543047)

No more mashed potatoes for you! I don't care how much "this means something" and "this is important", stop playing with your food.

3,000+ Galaxies! Ha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6542994)

In the side panel on the right:
"Extrasolar Life Briefing
# 3,000+ visible galaxies (Hubble Telescope)"


not according to this [anzwers.org]. Dumbass reporters.

A little OT but (5, Interesting)

geeveees (690232) | more than 10 years ago | (#6542999)

Why do we always assume that the aliens will be more advanced than us? How do we know we won't be visiting alien planets and abduct its inhabitants? Just a little something to think about...

Re:A little OT but (1)

geeveees (690232) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543057)

This wasn't meant as "funny" heh... I would really like to have /.'s opinion on this.

Re:A little OT but (1)

Lost Penguin (636359) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543076)

We won't kidnap the primative aliens, we will search their planet for IRAQ's WMD's (they do exist, honest)

Re:A little OT but (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543087)

Any aliens that we detect from their signals probably would be more advanced than us. Since we're not in a position to conduct butt-probes on less advanced life (even if we wanted to), the question is rather moot.

Re:A little OT but (1)

geeveees (690232) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543108)

Maybe we should send out more signals?

Re:A little OT but (3, Funny)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543116)

Like any newsgroup/forum, it's probably best to lurk for a while before posting. I'm not sure I'd like to find out what an interstellar flamewar is like.

Some of us (0, Redundant)

Exiler (589908) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543005)

haven't given up on finding intelligent life on earth.

As rare as it is there must be some concentrations of it.

If the signal has INCREASED? (2, Funny)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543006)

OK... the article notes:

"The next step is particularly fascinating, if a signal appears to have increased since the first observation put that star on the checklist."

How could it have increased?

These signals are coming from light-years away.

Even if the aliens learned, somehow (say, a year ago) that we were listening for them, finding this out instantly via some sort of "subspace radio" or the like, the signals we have received since then were ALREADY IN TRANSIT when the SETI@home program began.

Besides, there'd be no way for them to know we're listening, let alone to find that out within the last year.

Or maybe I just grossly misread the poster's meaning?

Re:If the signal has INCREASED? (2, Insightful)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543073)

Imagine the signal strength of Earth TV signals from 1945 through to when cable/dish TV started to cut into it.

Also, they could have noticed us a while ago from radio signals, and we're only now getting the signal after they swung the antenna around to point at us.

Re:If the signal has INCREASED? (1)

BlacKat (114545) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543112)

Could you imagine if we managed to discover, decode and re-transmist some alien television or radio signal?

Want to be the "new station" would become one of the most watched/listened to station in the history of this planet? :)

Re:If the signal has INCREASED? (2, Informative)

BWJones (18351) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543096)

How could it have increased?

Perhaps the signal is from an object like a pulsar that is increasing in mass near its center and increasing its rate of spin a'la conservation of angular momentum? After all the first time a pulsar was discovered, it was thought to be "little green men".

Re:If the signal has INCREASED? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543106)

I think the idea is that an alien civilization would have measurably increased their radio output during the two observation points, not that they would have done it as a reaction to us.

Kathleen Fent, whore/slut, dead at some old age (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543009)

I just heard some sad news on talk radio - popular whore and slut Kathleen Fent, was found dead in goatse's ass this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss her - even if you didn't enjoy her free blowjobs and big teeth, there's no denying her contributions to my penis. Truly a Slashdot icon.

LOL! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543105)

Where did you find this?
I wrote this a couple of months back, glad to see someone has taken an interest in my troll.
Thank you, sir. Keep on troollin!

The Stallion (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543011)

A full grown stallion's cock, when fully erect, will measure some two to
three feet long. It can be three to six inches thick at the base, to about
two inches thick at the head. Horses are somewhat different from other
animals in the way their cock head works. When a horse is fully erect and
excited and ready to mount, his cock head is somewhat pointed and not as
thick as might be normally observed. This is to facillatate an easier
entry into the mare. After the horse has entered and reaches a climax the
head swells (though it is more spongy then hard) into a fist sized mass as
he ejacultates. It is thought that this serves as a plug to force the
semen deep into the mare rather then allowing it to leak out. A full grown
stallion can ejaculate about one cup ( 8 ounces ) of semen. It will take
quite a few spurts to accomplish this. Each time his tail will raise and
lower in a brief flick. The first few jets are of a thin to average
consistency of cum. The final few jets are of a thick gelatinous
substance... it is thought that this serves to "seal" the mares pussy so
that the semen has time to do it's thing before leaking out. Horse semen
is extremely viscous, if you touch your finger to a pool of it you can draw
a thin string of it five to six feet long! Horse cum has a nice flat taste
to it...not at all bitter like man's cum. You can easily drink cups of it
with no discomfort.

The Mare - how to do it.

Mares can be quite satisfactory for the average well endowed male. If you
are somewhat less developed you might find better pleasure with a pony or
Miniature Horse. These are also better as they are lower to the ground. A
pony you can fuck standing up. A miniature horse on your knees or
squatting depending on the size. A mare will require something to stand on
or "platform shoes"...(IE mini stilts to raise you a foot off the ground)
so that you can reach her pussy.
Fucking any horse will depend on the horse. Some will be ready right
away...some will take coaxing. Pet the animal, talk to it softly, spend
time with it gaining it's trust. If something you are doing upsets it then
don't force it. Talk to it and calm it. If you work slowly you can make
an animal accept anything. It is just a question of helping it overcome
it's fears. All animals fear man if raised in the wild. How any animal
reacts will depend on it's own experiences. If you haved raised the animal
yourself in a loving enviroment, then you should have no problem
associating with it, if it is a strange animal that you have met in the
wild then you will have to go through an extended "courtship" to learn how
to respond to the beast.

MARES - TRAINING YOUR OWN

When the filly reaches weaning age, seperate her from her dam. If you have
limited time to spend then she should be put to pasture. If you have
plenty of time then you should keep her in a stall. Spend time with her
during the day petting and grooming her and allow her some time to run
free. Limit her access to other horses though and see that she spends at
least 8-12 hours a day in the stall. (Start with more free time and as she
approaches her first birthday confine her more...she is now at the right
age and her confinement will have made her so bored that she is amenable to
any new experience so long as it is not unpleasant)Young fillys have no
objection to someone playing with their pussy's. I have walked up on a pen
full of strange fillys at night and they came right up to me and I petted
them and felt up their pussys and they just lifted their tales and seemed
to enjoy it. These fillys didn't even know me but they were young,
inexperienced and bored...also since they were penned they were used to the
presence of people and did not fear me. Most horses in a large pasture
will run when they scent a strange human in their pasture at night.
If you sit on the ground and wait patiently, they will get downwind of you
and snort and fret, but eventually they will get curious and come
closer...you must wait until they have come close enough to smell and touch
you before saying anything or moving. Even then speak softly and move VERY
slowly so as not to spook them. If you can feed the horses and let them
smell you during the day on several occaisons then they will remember you
and come to you more readily when you appear in the middle of the night.
Also if you are seducing strange horses you should bring them food. This
is a good way to start a relationship.
Wild mares or those that have been artificially inseminated are usually
reluctant to have sex. The wild ones are used to violent horsecock and the
others have had peoples arms in their cunts so they can be apprehensive
about sexual events. Start rubbing ,scratching, etc in different areas
and observe the mare to see what she likes...almost all horses enjoy being
scratched under the chin and across the withers. Play with the horse until
it is comfortable with you and as you stroke it slowly move toward it's
hind end. Scratch her rump and around her tale and the move down her hind
legs. If she reacts to this well she might raise her tail
somewhat...gently rub her pussy and see how she reacts...if she doesn't get
violent then spit on your fingers and rub a couple of them through her
snatch...if she doesn't try to kick you then she is probably ready to fuck.
Note on horses and getting kicked.... Standing directly in front of a horse
is hazardous as it can raise on it's hind legs and come down with a front
hoof on your head. Standing 3-6 feet behind a horse is hazardous as it has
range to wind up and kick you a good one with the hind legs. Standing
beside a horse is fairly safe. It can only stomp on your toes which can be
avoided...standing behind a horse is safe if you are no farther then a foot
from it's rump..you are so close that the horse can't develop a full swing
and cannot kick you hard. If the horse can move forward you might fall
into range so try to tie up or use a stall or something so the animal
cannot pull away into striking range. If you make a good relationship
however the above is unnecessary though. I have had mare that welcomed
me...pushed back every time I shoved, and contracted her cunt to milk my
cock dry. Horses are some of the best pussy I have ever tried! And I have
tried plenty of PEOPLE & ANIMALS! Also horses are easily trainable! As
long as you make sure they enjoy what is happening and don't force them or
get angry with them if they misunderstand what you want of them, they will
love you always. Above all try to understand what they like and do it to
them....by doing whatever, to make them happy, they will respond by
granting you greater freedoms. Once you have succesfully fucked a filly a
few times she will be used to it and look forward to your visits so long as
you give her the attention she desires. You must experiment and treat her
as a lover and see what turns her on. Treat her as she wants and she will
give you all.

The Stallion

A stallion is is one of the most proudest, powerful, masculine, things
there is. All stallions are very oral and like to nibble and bite on
anything available. This can be annoying and painful and they should be
trained against it at a early age or else you should wear a padded suit, so
that they can bite you painlessly. This might be considered as a horse
that allows itself to be bitten without reacting is signalling that it is
sexually receptive. Stallions that have succesfully coupled in the wild
are somewhat resistant from seduction by humans. If they are isolated,
tempted and trained, then they will become more acquiessent but the best
ones are those that have been raised in a human enviroment since weaning,
since they have not had sex with other horses they are more amenable to
having sex with humans when their hormones kick in and they are looking for
some release. Bringing a wild horse to orgasm can be more difficult. They
are used to a mares pussy which is several degrees hotter then a humans
body heat. A person could fuck or suck them and not bring them to the
point of orgasm unless they had been isolated and deprived and unable to
help but cut loose with a load. Stallions can be readily trained though.
Most stud farms use artificial insemination, the stallions are aroused by
the scent of mares in heat and then an artificial vagina filled with warm
water is slipped over their cock and they reach orgasm. The stallions soon
learn the routine and just be leading them into the proper barn they know
what is coming and obtain an erection. This can work for you too. By
coming repeatedly to a horse and arousing him he will become trained to see
you as a sexual object. Soon just your presence will give him a throbbing
hard-on.

Arousing the Stallion

Stallions are aroused by the smell of horse pussy above all else.
If you have access to a mare, then gentle her till she will let you finger
her...then coat your fingers with her juice. Now rub your fingers across
the stallions nose! He will react even if she is not in heat! He knows
the smell! I have done this to geldings! Horses that have been castrated
and they still got a hardon!!! Also pet & rub the horse and rub his
cock...don't pull on it hard.. be gentle...big as it is it is still tender!
If you rub his belly and sheath slowly and gently and let him smell some
horse pussy juice then he will erect. If you can find a horse in heat then
grab some urine and refrigerate it. Take some out and thaw it when you
want it. Rubbing some hot mare piss on a stallions nose will make him
horny as hell! He will be all over you! Once a stallion smells that he
doesn't care what he fucks! He just wants a hot hole.
Make sure there are no other horses around...otherwise he will jump them
instead of you!
Some horses have been trained too react to certain cues, others react to
their own natural cues...I remember a $1,000,000.00 Arabian stallion I
trained.. He stuck his tounge out about 1/2 inch...when someone would rub
this small crescent he would instantly get a raging hardon...more proof
that stallions are very oral. This stallion had never had sex with a
mare...he had only climaxed through the intervention of humans and was
quite happy with having sex in a artificial vagina with the help of
humans...training does wonders.

NOONE SHOULD ATTEMPT VAGINAL OR ANAL INTERCOURSE WITH A STALLION
unless they have are experienced in fist fucking or have taken a large dog
in to the max ( IE knot and all). A horse has an enormus cock and could do
serious damage to someone who is not prepared. A horse cock can easily grow
as big as the knot in a large dogs cock so if you can't take that in then
you aren't ready. PS. A large dog can stretch you where a horse can fit
if you make the switch before the hole shrivels.

Country boys - you kbnow where the animals are and how to get them...you
don't need to read this.

City Boys - Drive out to the suburbs and find some isolated horses.. try to
encounter them in the day and get them used to you then return at night to
have some fun. IF there are stables around then spend some time there.
Sign up for riding lessons or whatever and then kindof fade out and help
groom the horses and clean the stalls. Chances or whoever runs the scene
will be glad for the help and won't question your prescence there. You can
help run the show by day and return for sex at night. Just be careful,
there is less privacy in the city as compared to the country. You sure
don't want to be caught!

New animals on the block!!

We now have miniature donkeys and horses as well as the larger ponys to
play with!

These animals reach a maximum of about 200 pounds for the purebreeds and
somewhat larger for the crossbreeds. You can buy or breed an animal just
for your size specifications! Male and female animals made to order.
Miniatures are currently selling (dec. 1991) for $300 to $3000 depending on
pedigree. Anyone can find a horse their size. Support and promote these
animals. They are salvation to us all. The mares are tight and the
stallions are all sizes...one can be found to fit any hole.

in the end... (1, Funny)

Malor (3658) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543036)

After vast effort and the expenditure of moderate sums of cash (SETI is really done on the cheap), scientists will be elated to finally discover an alien signal, and chagrined to find that it translates to the rough equivalent of a rude hand gesture and a raspberry. :-)

(or possibly "If all you can detect is this signal, you're too stupid to bother with. Stay home and evolve for a few million years.")

Re:in the end... (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543103)

Make Quatloos Fast! Increase your oomflogg! Causality septic tanks! Contact Ail Ralzqi of Mizar.

SETI is pointless(repost) (0, Flamebait)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543040)

I'm reposting this because apparently, there are a lot of moderators modding down as "troll" anyone who posts anything that even smells like "SETI is stupid". Despite getting one "interesting" mod, my post is now buried. So, here I go again. THIS IS NOT A TROLL. I've made a statement(SETI is pointless) and I'm backing it up with a lot of reasons why. Seems like good discussion material to me.

The whole thing is pointless. Here's why.

* Chance of physically intercepting the signal is next to nothing. They don't get much radio time, and they can't cover much of the sky.
* Now chances of actually recognizing the signal as intelligent life are unknown. They've got some great theories. Who knows if they're right?
* Ok, maybe you see it and you recognize it. Can you decode it?
* Alright, so who cares if you decode it, you FOUND INTELLIGENT LIFE that existed at least several hundred of years ago
* Ok, so you send a reply. You figure out where that source planet will be when the signal finally reaches it.
* "The aliens get it" requires the same hurdles. Mainly, they have a SETI program, they've got their ears pointed in the right direction, they identify the reply as intelligent life, etc. Hell, it assumes they haven't nuked themselves into extinction like we're on the steady path towards.
* Now, lets say they decide to reply(ie, they're not xenophobic, they don't think it's pointless, etc). It takes another couple hundred years to get back to earth, assuming they aim right etc.
* Now you're assuming someone here on earth actually is still listening. In a couple hundred years, is anyone going to remember SETI? We have trouble keeping languages around!
* Great, someone's actually listening and gets the signal. You've just had the century-long equivalent of the 20 second bar conversation. "Hi". "Hi". "So, uh, send radio signals often?"

SETI people conveniently ignore almost all of these obvious problems that make the entire search pointless.

Re:SETI is pointless(repost) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543064)


* Ok, so you send a reply. You figure out where that source planet will be when the signal finally reaches it.


You had me up to here. The point of SETI doesn't really seem to me to be "establishing contact." Rather, the point would be to learn from these communications; if you don't see the value in that I cannot help you. Some might say there are better uses for distributed CPU cycles, and I might agree; to call SETI pointless however is missing the point.

Re:SETI is pointless(repost) (4, Insightful)

lord_dragonsfyre (89589) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543069)

First off, even if we never find life out there, the mere existance of SETI@home helped get the idea of massively distributed computing out there as a viable option.

Second, I don't think anyone is claiming that radio waves are a viable method of intersteller communication (frankly, all the options there suck, barring the discovery of handwavium or similar magic-tech).

The point isn't to find a race out there to chat with. The point is to find evidence that, at some point in the past, *someone* out there emitted radio signals. Are they still around? Can we call them up and discuss deep, philosophical questions? Maybe, and probably not. But proving that intelligent life exists or existed off Earth, even if it went extinct long ago by our reckoning, is a worthy enough project, in my less-than-humble opinion.

James.

Re:SETI is pointless(repost) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543102)

"SETI@home helped get the idea of massively distributed computing out there as a viable option."

Bullshit. Distributed.net's RC5 distributed client predates SETI. The distributed.net client was released in February 1997. SETI@Home didn't start until 1999.

Re:SETI is pointless(repost) (1)

Zuph (637241) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543124)

SETI managed to get the public in on it though. Finding Aliens is a whole lot cooler than crunching meaningless numbers. ... Right?

Re:SETI is pointless(repost) (2, Insightful)

geekster (87252) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543070)

You think nobody would care if we found evidence of intelligent life on another planet?

Re:SETI is pointless(repost) (1)

seeken (10107) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543094)

If seti finds an alien signal, it will probably be alien pay sat-tv signals. We won't be able to decode them because of the DMCA.

Re:SETI is pointless(repost) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543130)

lol, the moderators have wisened up and modded your post as 'over-rated' instead of 'troll'. This will allow them to escape the wrath of the meta-moderators.

The Soviet Union! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543056)

The Hymn of the Soviet Union

Unbreakable Union of freeborn Republics,
Great Russia has welded forever to stand.
Created in struggle by will of the people,
United and mighty, our Soviet land!

Sing to the Motherland, home of the free,
Bulwark of peoples in brotherhood strong.
O Party of Lenin, the strength of the people,
To Communism's triumph lead us on!

Through tempests the sunrays of freedom have cheered us,
Along the new path where great Lenin did lead.
To a righteous cause he raised up the peoples,
Inspired them to labor and valorous deed.
[Or, the old way:
Be true to the people, thus Stalin has reared us,
Inspire us to labor and valorous deed!]

Sing to the Motherland, home of the free,
Bulwark of peoples in brotherhood strong.
O Party of Lenin, the strength of the people,
To Communism's triumph lead us on!

In the vict'ry of Communism's deathless ideal,
We see the future of our dear land.
And to her fluttering scarlet banner,
Selflessly true we always shall stand!

SETI is NOT cool (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6543059)

SETI is not cool. The only people who run it are the sort who probably have Ham radios, or a train set in the basement. The only guy I've ever seen run it at work was this fat sum bitch, must have been 400 pounds, the guy was. Ran the screen-saver, which, as everyone knows, chews cycles. If the fat fuck was serious about it, he would just crunch the numbers, without the pussified screen saver. But no, the 400 pounds of loser was just SCREAMING to be asked what that oh-so-cool pattern was, then he could tell the babes who would NEVER EVER even THINK of him in any sexual context other than disgust that HE, the FAT FUCK, was SEARCHING FOR EXTRATERRESTRIAL LIFE. Pitiful.

Signals from space (0, Troll)

Lost Penguin (636359) | more than 10 years ago | (#6543060)

All the signals from space are messages:

Penis enlargements
Breast enhancements
Displaced aliens with large amounts of money that need YOUR bank numbers.

Do we REALLY want to reply?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...