Searchlites Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SearchLites Vol. 22 No. 3, Summer 2016 The Quarterly Newsletter of The SETI League, Inc. Offices: 433 Liberty Street Special METI Issue Little Ferry NJ 07643 USA The emerging science of METI (Messaging to Extraterrestrial Intel- Phone: ligence, also known as Active SETI) has in recent years emerged as a (201) 641-1770 Facsimile: subject of major controversy within the SETI community. At present, (201) 641-1771 Email: The SETI League is not directly involved in experiments involving [email protected] transmissions into space, and we have as yet adopted no official policy Web: www.setileague.org on the matter. Several of our members have voiced support of pursu- President ing active messaging from Earth, while many others believe such a Richard Factor pursuit to be fraught with dangers. This issue of SearchLites is de- Registered Agent: voted to several Guest Editorials, which espouse opinions on both Anthony Agnello sides of the METI issue. Secretary/Treasurer: A. Heather Wood The stated goal of SETI science (as well as its companion activity Executive Director Emeritus: of METI) is to stimulate contact between the inhabitants of Earth and H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D. our cosmic companions. Disagreement as to the wisdom of actively Trustee: soliciting dialog centers on perceived inherent risks, as well as differ- Martin Schreiber, CPA ing opinions as to the risk/reward ratio. In contemplating the diversity Advisory Board: of opinions expressed by the various authors whose works appear in Anthony Agnello this newsletter, we urge our members to remember that not all trans- Greg Bear Paul Davies, Ph.D. missions into space are created equal. Both risk and reward are a func- Robert S. Dixon, Ph.D. tion of several calculable variables, as well as numerous incalculable Frank D. Drake, Ph.D. Claudio Maccone, Ph.D. ones. These include transmitter power, directionality, detectability, and Clifford Stoll, Ph.D. duration, as well as information content, coding methodology, and the values and perceptions of the recipient of such messages in a bottle. SearchLites , ISSN 1096-5599, is the Quarterly Newsletter of The SETI League, Inc ., a membership-supported, non- While there are no easy answers to the METI debate, we make a profit [501(c)(3)], educational sharp distinction between three specific types of METI activities: sci- and scientific corporation, dedi- cated to the electromagnetic entific experiments, commercial pursuits, and publicity stunts. All Search for Extra-Terrestrial three classes of transmission have occurred in recent decades, and Intelligence. SETI League, Dr. SETI, and the above logo are all many more have been proposed. The SETI League opposes blanket registered service marks of The policies that would either inhibit science, or encourage pseudo-science. SETI League, Inc. Entire con- tents copyright © 2016 by The Rather, we would hope that each METI proposal to come before the SETI League, Inc. Permission SETI community be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In the final is hereby granted for re- production in whole or in part, analysis, those who propose and oppose METI activity must come to provided credit is given. All opinions expressed are those an agreement as to how best to pursue meaningful science, without ex- of the individual contributors. posing humanity to irreversible risk. Page 1 Search Lites Volume 22, Number 3 -- Summer 2016 Guest Editorial: lesser ones. It’s not typically great for the less advanced soci- ety whose culture tends to get run over, even if intentions are Is Active SETI Really Dangerous? good on the part of those making contact. We have plenty of by John Traphagan data to support this scenario from our own history. In general, when we think about scientific inquiry, much Put another way, if ET is so advanced, shouldn’t they of its power rests in the idea that everything is open to ques- have something equivalent to Star Trek’s Prime Directive in tion. Turning a scientific gaze upon the world enlightens us which they make every effort to avoid meddling in the devel- and opens our potential to understand more deeply, while of- opment of less advanced civilizations? Perhaps the very fact ten challenging us to reconsider previously held beliefs and that they sent the message indicates nefarious intentions, or ideas. But science is not an unambiguously moral good. just plain stupidity, on the part of aliens who didn’t give much Einstein questioned the ethics of building the atomic thought to how sending might negatively influence the civili- bomb. We know that research like the Tuskegee study of zation at the receiving end, whose culture they knew nothing about when they sent the message. syphilis in African Americans has deep moral problems re- lated to racism and informed consent. More recently, Stephen Now, we need to turn this around to ourselves. Many sci- Hawking and others have raised ethical questions about entists in the SETI community argue against METI on the whether or not we should engage in sending messages to the grounds that it is dangerous. We should simply wait and listen stars — the risks of letting ET know we’re here may outweigh until we are sufficiently advanced to deal with contact. We the benefits of making contact if ET happens to be in a par- should hold off until we mature from our cultural and techno- ticularly foul mood when they answer our interstellar phone logical adolescence, whatever that means, to adulthood. call. However, if we really think about it, the activity likely to Those opposing Active SETI or METI (messaging extra- be more dangerous to humans is receipt of a signal rather than terrestrial intelligence) have a point. There could be some risk sending a message. The way in which people will react on our involved with alerting ET to our presence in the universe, al- socially fragile world is quite unpredictable. Awareness of the though if ET has knowledge of physics allowing them to visit existence of another likely more technologically advanced our corner of the galaxy, hiding probably won’t do us much civilization might propel our world into political chaos or it good anyway. If the extraterrestrials want to vaporize us, might have little influence. And we are left with the problem they’ll go ahead and do it. More likely the extreme distances of what to think about an extraterrestrial civilization that sent a between Earth and possible other civilizations will mitigate message without giving much thought to what it might do at against any real threat — if we send a message out to a star in the other end. Those aliens may be malicious at worst or naïve the Orion constellation today, it will take over 1,000 years to at best. Neither possibility is terribly good from our perspec- get there... tive. Perhaps a more important question is not about the risks The alternative, of course, is to roll up in a ball and hide. of transmitting, but the dangers in receiving. Many in the This seems rather pointless, since the genie is already out of SETI community have shown commitment to the belief that a the bottle, given the wide array of transmissions we constantly technologically advanced civilization will be altruistic, despite send from our planet. A society with technology 1,000 or the lack of evidence supporting that assumption. Therefore it 10,000 years beyond ours may well be able to pick up even the is assumed there are no significant risks with listening quietly. faint signals we are leaking out to the galaxy. Maybe they’re right. But even so, contact may prove quite Instead of hiding, we should give a great deal of thought dangerous to humans. to the kind of message we might send and to what the possible Why? Because of the potential to destabilize our civiliza- consequences are of sending. By consequences here, I do not tion. How will humans react? Will there be panic, infighting, mean self-centered worries about ET blasting us, but other- conflict? Imagine if the Chinese intercept the first message centered concerns about how sending a message might influ- ence or harm the recipient. from aliens and want to keep the information they gain to themselves. How will the American and other governments Perhaps the silence we have experienced to date is a respond if they think the Chinese might have information from product of more advanced civilizations saying, “don’t send ET about physics that would allow them to build super weap- anything that way; those beings are primitive and we might ons? How will religious zealots, who are suddenly confronted ruin their development.” If that’s the case, then our only shot with the idea that humans may not be so special after all, cope at contact will be METI as a way of alerting extraterrestrials with news that we are not alone? Imagine if ET sends us an that we are ready for contact. encyclopedia of information about themselves in which we If SETI scientists are right and ET is likely to be much learn that they are a civilization of card-carrying atheists. older and wiser than humans, the real question is not the dan- And, perhaps, the most important question is what does gers of sending a message, but the risks of receiving one. It sending a message say about them? One way to interpret this seems much less likely that messaging to more advanced is to assume it means they want contact. But if they are sig- extraterrestrials will have a significant impact on their society, nificantly more advanced than we are morally (and there’s no while receipt of a message from advanced extraterrestrials guarantee), perhaps they are also aware of what normally hap- might have a very significant impact on ours.