Search for Galactic Civilizations
A 2015 paper in Astrophysical Journal reported the results of G-HAT (Glimpsing Heat from Alien Technologies) survey. Using data from NASA's orbiting WISE observatory, Penn State astronomers searched for so called Type III civilizations in 100,000 galaxies beyond our Milky Way.
In the 1960s, Kardeshev, a Russian astronomer, classified hypothetical civilizations based on their energy use. A Type III civilization consumes the entire energy output of its galaxy. Such a civilization is called K3 (Kardeshev 3) by the researchers.
The G-HAT study found no such civilization in any of the 100,000 galaxies surveyed. While some ET civilizations might span an entire "island universe," none are utilizing all the energy from the stars in it.
The researchers did find unusually high levels of mid infrared radiation in 50 of the galaxies. While a K3 civilization doesn't appear to exist, a K 2.8 or K 2.9 civilization, utilizing 1-10% of available galactic energy, may be possible. Further research will try to determine if the mid level IR energy results from natural processes or is artificial.
I have three comments:
- First, any galaxy with a K3 system would be difficult to detect or recognize as a galaxy in the first place. Capturing and utilizing all stellar energy would require covering all galactic stars with Dyson spheres, or similar structures. To an outside observer, the stars would be blotted out. Moreover, Dyson spheres, if efficient, would give off only minimal infrared energy, which is invisible. There might be some K3 civilizations which have simply proved undetectable, or are not recognizable as galaxies.
- Second, if the observed levels of mid infrared are natural, why are they so rare? Fifty galaxies out of 100,000 is a mere 1/20 of 1%--only one galaxy in 2,000. Abundant mid IR would be understandable if it were due to a spreading intelligence. Colonizing and exploiting much of a galaxy is a daunting challenge. It probably isn't particularly common. Natural causes, on the other hand, should be. And what is the cause? Extensive dust lanes, comets and solid bodies that soak up stellar radiation and reradiate it as IR? All galaxies probably have that. Perhaps some galaxies have more than others if for some reason there was more nucleosynthesis, hence a greater percentage of nonradiating mass (except for IR) formed of heavier elements. But I don't know what circumstances might've led to that.
- Third, what we see is not the current situation in remote galaxies but the distant past. If a galaxy is 100 million light years distant we're seeing it as it was when Earth was dominated by dinosaurs. If ETs 50,000 LY away could look at Earth, they'd see no evidence of civilization whatsoever. It is possible that civilizations, even some approaching K3 status, arose in the period between the remote past, as seen now, and the actual present in distant areas of the Universe.
posted by starman at 6:50 AM
109 Comments:
Any new reports on this? It seems 50 galaxies with much IR is the second recent evidence for ET, after the KIC discovery.
You mentioned natural source of infrared radiation. Do such natural source produce the same IR as "mid" infrared radiation?
Yes 50 galaxies with unusually high mid IR levels is, like the aperiodically dimmed KIC star, possible evidence of ETs.
very interesting! My concept however, which is what type of future I would advocate for the human race, would be much more in the vein of a thin, broad expansion--like I would rather consume (i.e., convert visible to IR) 1% of a hundred galaxies' radiation than consume 100% of our home galaxy's light--because I believe that we will be able to migrate intergalactically at say 1/10 of the speed of light, which would put MANY galaxies within our range of travel within even such "short" time spans as 100 million to a billion years.
Of course you know it must seem presumptuous of me to imagine that I could persuade humanity to my way of thinking on this!!!!! I mean do you suppose I might be able to persuade YOU about this?????
I mean there is SO much energy out there that even if the human population multiplies a quadrillion-fold, we still wouldn't need to use 100% of our own galaxy's light even in order to maintain a fabulously wealthy civilization, would we? Or would we? This calculation is a little beyond me right now, but what do YOU think?
Now to get back to earlier thread I was of course really glad that Bernie won in Wisconsin and I haven't read this so I may be mistaken, maybe you have seen polls, but I think that he won in both Michigan and WI by far larger margins than polls had predicted? CA polls I have seen show him 10-12% behind Hillary, but I think the pollsters are missing two factors (1) Bernie's supporters are dedicated enthusiastic, so more likely to vote, while Hillary supporters are bored; and (2) pollsters gauge a respondent's probability of voting by whether they voted in the previous or several previous elections, which will severely underweight Bernie supporters because in all previous elections for the last 40 years there has been no major candidate worth voting for (excuse me, I just ran into a guy last night who said that Carter was worth voting for in 1976-80; but at least since 1980 it's been a total waste as far as major parties go, Perot and Nader were great but doomed because they were independent unfortunately). Or what is your opinion on this?
Hi progrev,
I just edited this post and deleted the previous one, as it was pretty trivial.
Would it be practical to go to distant galaxies when there are plenty of stars still untapped in our own? It seems likely only machines or androids can survive any kind of lengthy space mission. Even interplanetary travel is tough on the human body. Maybe future spacefarers will be human only mentally, since physically they'll probably have to have better innate protection from radiation and zero gravity.
Another possibility is travel via some really exotic method like space warp. It's claimed a vessel can travel, via arcane physics, to a remote destination by bringing it closer not by going there.
I don't know how CA will go. You're in a much better position. It's been claimed though, that due to delegate math Sanders now stands no chance. What's your take on that?
Interesting piece! At least some of your"future vision"post are indeed on topics relevant to the future.
The Andromeda galaxy couldn't have a K3 civilization or we amateurs couldn't see it right?
But Astronomers would've detected an area of infrared emission?
Could a K3 civilization build Dyson spheres around stars where they're relatively tightly packed, like in globular clusters or near the galactic center?
if I may presume to try to respond to Emmanuel's question first in my opinion to my knowledge, Dyson spheres are small in comparison to interstellar distances even in the dense clusters or near the galactic center. A Dyson sphere might be a billion or two miles in diameter (and might be even much smaller than that), I think, while stars are at least ten times that I believe however I will try to check that out and anyhow Tim probably will answer you soon.
As for intergalactic travel, typically taking tens of millions of years, you know I presume that it will be done via large fleets of 100+ giant O'Neill space colonies, where each such ship will have all the environments we are familiar with on Earth, cities/suburbs/forests etc., and artificial gravity, so thousands of generations of travelers will pass between exiting one galaxy and entering the next; plus, I suspect although you don't read too much about this, that there are many intergalactic stars waay out there all lonesome, kicked out of galaxies by more massive stars moving around, like planets getting kicked around in the early Solar System; it would be a fun break to come upon such an isolated star probably with its family of planets, to spend a few hundred years on before continuing on the way to the destination galaxy.... Also, very importantly IMO is that while we are travelling away out there, we will remain in continuous and abundant communication with our home worlds back in the Milky Way etc.
I do presume that before we set out intergalactically, we will have colonized many to most of the stars of our own MW, but again that colonization I would advocate thin, like maybe only a billion people per star (and probably far fewer than that around MOST stars, which probably offer little in the way of hospitable natural environments)--which again even if fabulously wealthy should only consume like 1% of their star's light I suppose.
Yes. I'd assume that by shrouding all stars with energy collecting devices, a K3 system would make the Andromeda galaxy invisible to the naked eye, and most amateur observers. But astronomers could still detect IR--unless K3 systems were extremely thorough and efficient.
Progrev is right. A Dyson sphere might be no more than 10-50 million miles in diameter---well within the orbits of many planets. There might not be enough material for bigger ones of say 500 million miles, and in any event such structures would be FAR smaller than interstellar distances, even near the galactic center.
I'm not sure I remember correctly but in this area of the galaxy the nearest star, Proxima Centauri, is over 250,000 AU away i.e. over a quarter million times the Earth-sun distance. If the average distance between stars were 100 times less near the galactic enter, that's WAY smaller than a Dyson sphere of the sizes mentioned.
Progrev, a veneer or thin colonization might be inevitable given so many unstable or short lived stars we'd have to avoid, along with others with no suitable planets for terraforming. But any system able to undertake interstellar travel might be able to deal with all kinds of issues.
Wouldn't humans or androids be in a state suspended animation to conserve energy during long interstellar voyages?
How can such ambitious schemes as progress proposes ever be reality if we can't even go back to the moon?
When night interstellar travel begin?
Assuming travel no faster than 1/10 c, or one tenth the speed of light, and no radical alteration of our current physical make-up, some sort of reduced interim activity may be imperative (IF our current physical bodies and minds could take it...).
Good point about not even returning to the moon. I've long maintained that no real space effort--no exploration, colonization or astroengineering on a grand scale--will ever be possible under the present system, in which the individual, not great common causes, is paramount. Far more is currently spent on alcohol, candy and tobacco than on space.
If a better, wholistic system can arise in his century, real progress in space should begin by c 2100.
Our milky way galaxy clearly has no k3 civilization. But it widespread colonization has still occurred might most of the worthwhile (inhabitable, terraformable)MW destination already be occupied?
I mean, since earth is new at this space travel business, and any other space travelers are farther advanced, is there really much opportunity for expansion on our part?
True the MW is very big so much depends on how far apart original center of civilization are no?
And how fast the rate of expansion is?
Sure it's entirely possible that ETs have already taken over much of the galaxy, limiting what's still available to us. We shouldn't assume we have the whole Milky Way to ourselves.
Yes, it's quite possible other civilizations have had a big head start. And yes, much depends on how long they've been at it, how rapidly they're expanding, how many of them exist and how far apart they originally were.
Will we really be limited to one tenth light speed by 2100 or 2200?
Is that the best we'll ever do?
No, I don't think one tenth light speed is the best we'll ever do. I don't know whether we'll do better by 2100 or not but I think far faster interstellar travel will ultimately be possible. Among "mainstream" scientists, UFOs may not be fashionable but IMO many reports are credible and suggest rapid movement across light years.
Why is NASA's budget so small?
Is there actual evidence for ETs in our galaxy.
Besides the KIC star that is?
Wow, so many ideas in here I wanted to respond to but let me begin by saying that I am really optimistic about the future for this paradoxical reason which is that the current rotten system is so bad, with its wars and poverty and depressions--and I believe another depression coming soon because the current ruling class of the world has been so badly mismanaging the world economy that it will make the great depression of the 1930s look like Beverly Hills...people eventually won't put up with it any more and will rise up and change things drastically and dramatically, as they have in past revolutions, admittedly the Russian Revolution failed to establish the "Workers' Paradise" but we can learn from their experience and do it better this time IMO and at least the USSR did inaugurate the Space Age with Sputnik in 1957 and might have progressed from there--and maybe the US would have progressed too after 1969 except that both countries were caught up in the Cold War that sapped their economies with stupid arms races and Vietnam etc.; and since then, IMO what has happened is that the rich the 1% have taken control of the US gov't, and their primary goal is to keep taxes low--and that has put an end to progress, the US (and world, following America's lead into this regime of being ruled by the 1%), now declining in every way, poverty and homelessness and crime now all rising--when will THE MASSES rise up?!
I do believe that the mathematics of it seem to almost prove that there are many civilizations more advanced than ours by billions of years--which suggests to me that they will have already long since spread out through all of the galaxies just as we will have within a billion years; so I believe indeed that they are all around us, probably at least in large numbers all around the Solar System, but for some reason they do not want to reveal themselves to us in a broad general way, only through occasional UFO incidents perhaps; an interesting question is why DON'T they want to reveal themselves completely and Tim and I have discussed that in the past, what do you think, emmanuel?
We might indeed someday go faster than 1/10 c, but really there's no point in it. Why would you want to go any faster than that? Even if you went warp factor 100 (which I suppose means 100 c), it would take more than your normal whole life span to get to Andromeda or wherever, so it has to still be a multigenerational trip or you could be suspended in near-zero K cold, although again, life aboard O"Neill space colonies can be just as rich and full as life on Earth.
Let me make this additional point, which is that the universe is ABUNDANT in natural wealth, as I've said, even trillions of people could live super-fabulously wealthy lives without consuming 1% of the Sun's light IMO so there is PLENTY of room out in space to go and share with all the other advanced civilizations--although I do agree with Tim too that ultimately we will want to control our population, a few trillion or quadrillion or quintillions of us humans may be all the Universe needs :)
Emmanuel,
NASA's budget is small because in a democracy, politicians must appropriate funds based on what voters want, and they usually want their money spent only on things of direct benefit to them. Furthermore, the voters want taxes as low as possible. The combination of low taxes, hence limited government revenue, plus the priority given to more popular social programs, means NASA gets relatively little funding--only about one fourth of what Americans spend annually on tobacco alone.
There is virtually no evidence for ET accepted by "mainstream" scientists besides KIC amd the "wow!" signal of the '70s.
Of course I agree with progrev. ET is already all around us and here. A plethora of UFO sightings prove it. I've written at great length of ET planning and motivation, based on my decades of study of the phenomenon. I also believe the present system is the heart of the problem, and coming crises will wreck it and bring about a better system, conducive to real progress.
What do you think of NASA's investment in mars exploration?
Mars is of some interest and has the advantage of being relatively close. But despite its mystique, stemming from sci fi, it's not a good place to look for life. With a mere tenth or so of Earth's mass, Mars was bound to be lifeless, or essentially so. NASA has spent too much on Mars exploration. It should invest the money in the search for exoplanets. Missions like Kepler should have priority over Mars.
By the way, are there amateur astronomers here?
If so what were some memorable sights?
I've been an amateur astronomer for quite some time. I saw the transit of Venus in 2004. Clouds prevented me from seeing the transit of 2012. The Leonid meteor shower of 2001 and my first sighting of Mercury were also memorable.
Have you see Mars?
If so, when for the first time?
Lol, of course I've seen Mars. The first time was back in May 1971, and I've seen just about all the oppositions since.
Progrev just curious--when have you seen it?
What galaxies nearest to us?
again so many things I want to respond to but let me start from the most recent and work backwards. There are a bunch of galaxies in our local group including the Magellanic Clouds and fragmentary "little" ones, but the nearest LARGE galaxy is Andromeda which I think is a couple million LY away (and coming closer, so that in a few billion years we'll merge with it or maybe partly pass through it).
My eyesight is very poor so I have never seen Mars or much of anything else, Orion's belt and so on but for me it is far more interesting to read about the stars in books/magazines/online.
This is one thing I disagree with starman about, I don't think the main purpose of space exploration is to search for life, --that life the ET's will reveal themselves to us in all good time, no rush. The purpose of space exploration is first to colonize the Solar System, which is full of wonderful places, planets asteroids comets and moons on which we can build great new civilizations; this should preoccupy humanity for the next thousand years--through the Third Millennium just now beginning. After about the Year 3000, to begin exploring and migrating throughout the MW Galaxy; and then, maybe tens of thousands of years after that, to begin intergalactic travel and colonization except, of course, I don't mean colonies in any sense of places we should dominate, but settlements all cooperating as progressive equals.
I beg to differ also with starman in the source of our problem, which is IMO caused by the rule of the 1% because the MAJORITY of the whole population are enthusiastic supporters of space, polls show. It certainly is true that this majority don't want to pay more taxes, but they are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT to want to keep their OWN taxes down because it's the 1% who need to be charged FAR MORE in taxes, but again since they own Congress, they won't tax themselves. That's why we need Revolution.
Adequate taxation of the rich and corporations would result in BOTH more programs to improve people's opportunities, education, and lives on Earth AND space exploration.
SPACE is the great destiny of all humanity. I of course strongly support whatever NASA does but far more important is to bring all the other nations into a great cooperative GLOBAL space program geared to progress for ALL. Again of course that will only happen after great revolutions at both national and world levels.
Thanks for answering the question about nearest galaxy progrev.:)
I didn't say the main purpose of space exploration is to search for life. But much Mars research has focused on that. That was true of the Viking landers of the mid '70s, while Sprit and Opportunity have found additional evidence of liquid water, a prerequisite for life.
What polls indicate a majority enthusiastically supports space? If that were true i.e. if they REALLY wanted it, politicians would promise to spend more, but I don't see any current candidates making such a promise. The masses no doubt give space a much lower priority than programs of direct benefit to them. As for the necessity of taxing the rich to pay for it, I've noted that annual spending on tobacco alone, in the US, is four times greater than NASA's budget. Are the rich buying all those cigarettes? :)
If the rich are so dominant, why has the minimum wage gone up, or exist at all, and why have many industries relocated to foreign countries? If the rich ran the government, they could just keep wages way down here. I don't doubt they're powerful but in a democracy they're hardly the majority.
But I certainly agree that space expansion should involve the whole globe. You've seen my predictions of a future World Government. And yes, ultimately ET will reveal himself--when we have a better government.
Progrev I just read mars sometimes gets very bright. You 've never seen it?
Have you seen Venus, the brightest planet?
Has anyone here seen Mercury, the sizzling little planet nearest the sun?
I've been seeing Mercury for many years. Venus is the brightest planet and much easier to spot.
What about Jupiter and saturn?
Uranus and Neptune?
Yes I've seen them too. Jupiter and Saturn are interesting to observe. I've seldom seen Neptune and never saw Pluto. The latter, however, is no longer considered a planet so I've seen all the planets--in our solar system at least.
Have you seen galaxies?
What about perseids?
Have you seen lo and Ganymede near jupiter?
as for me, I've never really seen Mars or any other planet, asteroid, or moon other than our own Moon--although I did look up to see the comet Hale-Bopp (about 15 years ago?) when a bunch of people in San Diego suicided to it, do you remember that? Again with my poor eyesight, I really love looking at the photos of them in books but you know, when I am looking at like pictures of the Moon and so forth, I am always thinking like how fun it would be to go exploring around on the ground and build homes and cities on all those different surfaces like on the Moon I'd want to build cities on the rims of craters or where rilles intersect or where rilles intersect rims or atop the highest mountains, etc. If any such thoughts interest you, visit my website spacedreams.org, especially the first page and the asteroids and spaceships page.
The reason that political candidates don't much advocate space programs is precisely that they are beholden to the rich--remember when Newt Gingrich came out for boosting space programs, he was right to think that that would be popular--but you know he didn't talk about it for very long because he finally figured out what was probably obvious to his audience, which is that you can't go back into space if you want to keep taxes low for the rich. I have to admit that the minimum wage-raising movement does show that the masses do have some power, but they are doing it all wrong and it's going to fail because it SHOULD be funded by the Earned Income Tax Credit based on taxing the rich--but the rich are powerful enough to prevent that, so it's being imposed as a mandate on employers, who will pass on their added costs to poor customers, or increase their use of machinery, or reduce their employees' hours, or other destructive practices that will wind up keeping profits high while destroying the national economy--this is just another great example of how they are wrecking it and pushing us into a Second Great Depression...really it's a great example of how the rich, as well as the masses, are so short-sighted they are digging their own graves through policies that benefit themselves in the short run only
emmanuel,
Yes I've seen galaxies, all four Galilean satellites of Jupiter and Perseid meteors (the latter not for many years though).
progrev,
Sure I remember comet Hale Bopp. That was over 19 years ago, back around March 1997. I also saw comet Hyatutake the previous year. My eyesight isn't great either and I rely heavily on optical assistance (binoculars and telescopes).
It would be tough to build colonies in most lunar regions because water may only be accessible near the poles.
It seems the US is able to do a lot of things while keeping taxes low for the rich. If advocating big outlays for space is the key to popularity, it's odd candidates aren't doing it now. I agree that rich and poor alike are very short sighted though.
Did you ever see Vulcan?
Or a comet?
Is Copernicus a good telescopic object?
Lol, Vulcan is mythical. Of course I've seen comets--see my comment above. And yes Copernicus is a good telescopic object--a large crater with nice central peaks and rim.
How bright is mercury?
When is it at its brightest?
Do you point your telescope at venus?
What do you see on Venus or mercury?
The Moon and Mercury and Mars will be colonizable to a large extent because we can easily build pipelines to carry water from the polar regions to the rest of the body--just look at the huge pipelines that carry oil on Earth, this isn't even the most expensive part of settling these worlds. Plus we'll be able to capture and transport comets with whole cubic km of H2O, you know NASA is already talking about doing things like that. It'll cost a few billion dollars but that will be easily afforded by the prosperous economy of the future assuming moderate growth rates and progressive taxes through the year 2100.
What do you mean by the US is able to do a lot of things while keeping taxes low for the rich? The government is ignoring all our problems like infrastructure and housing and better education and poverty and unemployment and low wages--in addition to space exploration, while racking up huge budget deficits and unfunded liabilities--ALL BECAUSE they are so dedicated to undertaxing the rich and corporations
emmanuel,
Mercury is brightest when at superior conjunction, on the other side of the sun. Even professional astronomers had difficulty making out surface features on Mercury. Yes I occasionally point a telescope at Venus but there's nothing to see except its phases, as it has permanent overcast.
progrev,
One problem with pipelines is that polar ice on Mercury,Mars and the moon never melts, so you'd have to heat it before moving it. It might be better to just mine it and then transport it to a lower latitude.
The US spends vast sums on a variety of social programs, including medicare. It isn't ignoring poverty, since those with limited means, many of them elderly, get all kinds of assistance. (Of course there's also the huge sums blown on the Iraq misadventure, due to jewish neocon power.) NASA's budget is nothing compared to that.
Will you see the transit of Mercury in may?
Is it safe to see it cross the sun?
I hope I can see the transit of Mercury in May. Clouds may spoil the event just like the 2012 transit of Venus...It's safe to see a transit of Mercury by projecting the sun's image on to a white piece of paper.
Did Sagan once estimate how fast a civilization could spread through the galaxy?
If so, how long would it take?
What happened to Sagan? I haven't heard anything from him lately.
Is it realistic to expect a k3 civilization, using literally all the energy output of a galaxy?
Yes, about 25 years ago Sagan, who passed away in 1996, estimated a single civilization could colonize the galaxy in a billion years. I don't think 95-100% utilization of the energy output of a whole galaxy is something we should expect to see.
How many money should NASA get?
How should the money be raised? What else should be cut or should taxes be raised?
What NASA project or goals should have priority?
Should humans go to Mars or Mercury?
Is SETI a good way to determine if there are advanced civilizations else where in our milky way galaxy or in the Andromeda galaxy?
NASA should get at least five times its current budget--no less than $100 billion annually. To provide the extra funding, the government should stop wasting money supporting Israel and Iraq, the severely retarded, and people in the last 6 months of their lives. Of course progrev wants to tax the rich, and while some wealth should be confiscated, especially the fortunes of pro-Israel types like Adelman, we shouldn't force the wealthy to live elsewhere.
NASA should prioritize the search for exoplanets and the development of new means of interplanetary and interstellar travel.
Only limited manned missions to Mercury and Mars should be undertaken until new technology makes them easier.
I doubt SETI is a good way to detect ET civilizations because most may give off radio waves for only a few decades of their histories. And UFOs indicate many are here now.
Correction: The name of the rich pro-Israel person is Adelson not Adelman. His full name is Sheldon Adelson, and he's been using his fortune to induce politicians to be more pro-Israel.
Where's progrev?
Why take money from Adelman?
How much money could you get from him?
wow again so much to respond to, let me take up these topics in reverse order. Starman probably has a more accurate figure but I think Adelson has a few billion dollars and I advocate capping wealth at $3 million, so we could get a few billion less $3 million from him, about a 99.9% tax rate. And THAT would be if he were perfectly benign--the fact that he may have promoted the likes of the Iraq war and other evils should mean that we ought to take even more money from him or put him in jail although as a general principle as a far-left liberal progressive I believe that punishments for crimes should be less severe than the crimes. How can you justify the death penalty for ordinary murder while George W. Bush walks free without even anybody mentioning bringing him to trial? Figures for the cost of the Iraq war run to a couple of trillion dollars and that is even totally ignoring the moral obligation which is that we OUGHT to pay for all Iraqi victims' medical treatments for their war injuries plus $50,000 for the families of each Iraqi killed (100,000 to a million) plus hundreds of billions more for the damage to buildings and infrastructure.
Can I elaborate on Starman's statement that civilizations may "give off" radio waves for only a few decades in the course of their development. I believe that each civilization is engaged in massive communication among all its far-flung members across the Galaxy and beyond, but they only BROADCAST for a few decades. I think that most of their communication is by laser narrow beams pointed at each other's specific rocket ships or cities although the phenomenon of laser radio waves is one I'm not sure of. Maybe they communicate via ultraviolet laserbeams. A given rocketship might be aiming such beams at a thousand other ships or cities, which will be a challenge since they are all moving rapidly with respect to each other.
Humans will certainly colonize Mars, Mercury, and all other bodies in the Solar System but there's little rush, by and large this can wait until the next century, although I would advocate building one colony each of 1,000 people on Mars., Mercury, and the Moon in order that SOME humans will survive in case of nuclear war or something extinguishing life on Earth.
NASA should spend its money helping to spread space capabilities to the countries now lacing in them such as African, Latin American, and Islamic countries; but of course these countries also want to do it for themselves only poverty is preventing them and so the US should join other rich countries in giant foreign aid programs to solve poverty and build a world of universal prosperity. Maybe the best use of NASA would be to promote popular interest in space worldwide with movies, books, and education.
As I explain on my cfprog.net website, we need to tax the rich and corporations to the tune of $2 trillion a year, which will provide abundant funds for NASA and all our other needs.
They DO have a lot of programs to help the poor but they don't add up to much and most of the money goes to health care which benefits only a small number of them. The key question is, How much help should disabled people who cannot work receive in benefits, and I am proposing something like 50-60% of the mean per-capita income, which would be like $25,000 a year; most of them now get barely half that, which is why it is correct to say that they are ignored and in LA, many get $221 a month, which is fascism--the rulers just don't give a damn about human lives.
I was interested to see Sagan's figure for a billion years to colonize the entire galaxy; maybe so but as I've said I prefer a much thinner colonization, where it would take only a 100 million years to colonize the MW before expanding to other galaxies.
emmanuel,
Last year Adelson had $28 billion, which is $28 billion more than he should have. ALL of his money should be taken from him. Adelson got his money via Ls Vegas gambling; he has nothing worthwhile to contribute and he uses money to bankroll candidates who are--or at least sound--totally pro-Israel.
progrev,
Always great to see you comment at length here. Imagine what we could do with Adelson's $28 billion. That's more than NASA's entire annual budget! It should be out to better uses--like finding exoplanets--than furthering the agenda of a traitorous swindler.
Long ago, Sagan mentioned exactly the same thing--"tight beam transmission" for communication. It's so much more efficient than broadcasting.
A number of other countries (besides Russia) already have space programs. China, even India are getting in on the act. There already is interest in space worldwide--but only among the more intelligent. The masses prefer soccor and sex--the only things the poor in Brazil are said to talk about.
Sure, it's likely civilization could be extended to the Andromeda galaxy before it finishes colonizing the Milky Way. But it's possible, or likely civilization is already expanding there now.
Is Kepler fixed now?
What about the interferometry mission?
Yes Kepler is fixed. The interferometry mission was cancelled in 2010. That's a shame; it would've been the best exoplanet finder ever.
I once heard of serpo the alleged alien planet. Has Kepler or any other instrument confirmed its existence?
What do you make of the alleged secret mission to serpo?
To my knowledge, Kepler hasn't verified "serpo." I'm skeptical of the alleged exchange program in which several humans are said to have gone to Seroo.
Glad my long posts aren't too wordy for you :) I think you'd probably agree that education could make a great difference in countries like Brazil where under the present circumstances the commonfolk talk only of soccer and sex, more widespread better schooling, books and movies might inspire more interest in Space--although it is noteworthy too that even kids without much education have a natural fascination with stars, planets, etc. (An idea I sometimes explore in my imagination is that it may be possible for even intelligent animals like dogs to get interested in space travel, such as trips to the Moon.) Maybe the tragedy is that somehow that natural youthful excitement, awe and curiosity somehow often get lost as they struggle to survive as adults in those desperate countries. There are cultural differences too, like (Asian) Indians seem to have an affinity for science and math, like the Mayans having their obsession with time and calendars; but I believe schooling and movies could make a huge difference along with good economic policies that would enable the masses to prosper.
And yes with regard to Adelson and other rich people and corporations, their taxes should take into consideration HOW they made their fortunes
Serpo couldn't be a K2 civilization right?
And no way it's K3?
emmanuel,
Sure no way serpo--if it exists-- could be K3 or even K2.
progrev,
Education would help no doubt but I believe most people are inherently nonintellectual. I've always doubted real progress would be possible unless an authoritarian, sacrificial system was in place.
As for Adelson, what bothers me is not so much how he made his fortune but what he's doing with it--essentially coercing or bribing politicians to be totally pro-Israel, regardless of the longterm costs to the US. Adelson is an agent of a foreign power, a traitor would considers Israel most important, the US less so.
What kind of planet is serpo supposed to be?
What did earth people allegedly see there?
Serpo is supposed to be Earthlike and inhabited. The earth team supposedly saw all kinds of stuff.
According to the serpo story did they see aliens there?
Is that were UFOs are supposed to come from?
So you don't believe the serpo story?
If you believe in UFOs why not?
Yes they supposedly saw aliens on serpo, their alleged home planet. I don't believe the story because the source isn't trustworthy and the information doesn't sound credible.
When did an earth team supposedly visit serpo?
So the source isn't trustworthy?
Why would he make up the story?
Will man begin interstellar travel by 2100?
An Earth team supposedly visited serpo back in 1965. The source is notorious;y untrustworthy, and probably out to make all UFOlogists look looney or gullible.
2100 is probably the earliest we'll begin interstellar travel. It assumes a major breakthrough by then. Manned or even adroid travel to another star system could take another century or more.
Since there is no k3 civilization in our galaxy, are reports of wide ranging aliens credible e.g. Hill case?
In my opinion yes. It's not necessary to utilize the entire energy output of a star to have interstellar travel.
If UFOs are real, are they from k2 systems?
Like I just said, I don't think it's necessary to capture or utilize the entire output of a star to have interstellar travel, so UFO civilizations aren't necessarily K2.
April 24, 2016
Post a Comment
<< Home