re: SETI has a foolish perspective

Space/Science » in reply to SETI has a foolish perspective

re: SETI has a foolish perspective

LJK — 12/17/2004 2:05:34 AM (archived)

The only reason advanced ETI might use such "primitive" communication technologies is if they want to make sure that we get their messages in both sense of the word.

Of course this leads into why would a Type II or III civilization want to communicate with us.

And also there is the possibility that societies exist around our level and have similar motivations as ours for Passive and Active SETI.

The whole thread (30 posts)

Is it time to scrap SETI? Of course not! - LJK - 12/16/2004 4:47:52 PM
- SETI has a foolish perspective - Eric - 12/17/2004 12:42:09 AM
  - Since we only have a dataset of one known civilization... - Larry J - 12/17/2004 4:19:04 AM
  - re: SETI has a foolish perspective - LJK - 12/17/2004 2:05:34 AM
    - Oh, I can't resist.... - Gary - 12/17/2004 4:48:05 PM
      - Kardashev Type Civilizations - LJK - 12/17/2004 5:13:02 PM
        
        Interesting that none of them use nuclear power. - Tom Brosz - 12/18/2004 5:16:23 PM
        
        re: Interesting that none of them use nuclear power. - LJK - 12/18/2004 5:25:30 PM
        
        Kaku is a charlatan - Gary - 12/18/2004 7:00:00 AM
        
        How could he... - Adam - 12/19/2004 11:00:19 PM
        
        Believe it or not: There are physicists who are scumbags - Gary - 12/20/2004 1:40:24 AM
        
        re: Kaku is a charlatan - LJK - 12/18/2004 4:36:16 PM
        
        My model on civilization types - Gary - 12/18/2004 8:15:48 PM
        
        re: My model on civilization types - Jesse - 7/11/2005 10:05:45 AM
    - re: SETI has a foolish perspective - DWC - 12/17/2004 6:52:22 AM
- re: Is it time to scrap SETI? Of course not! - Arthur Smith - 12/16/2004 5:39:32 PM
  - How big does a radio telescope have to be? - Gary - 12/16/2004 6:59:47 PM
    - As far as detecting accidental messages - alcaray - 12/16/2004 9:12:44 PM
      - Very true - we live in a noisy RF environment - Larry J - 12/16/2004 9:56:47 PM
    - re: How big does a radio telescope have to be? - Larry J - 12/16/2004 7:24:35 PM
      - If the ETI are advanced enough, they won't need RF - LJK - 12/16/2004 10:53:43 PM
      - not directly beamed - Arthur Smith - 12/16/2004 9:07:28 PM
        
        re: not directly beamed - Larry J - 12/16/2004 9:49:56 PM
        
        re: not directly beamed - Arthur Smith - 12/19/2004 3:53:47 AM
        
        Escaping the energy limit - Nick Hoffman - 12/20/2004 3:33:22 AM
        
        Who says that ETI will use radio signals? - LJK - 12/16/2004 10:57:51 PM
        
        re: Who says that ETI will use radio signals? - Larry J - 12/17/2004 4:12:30 AM
        
        re: Who says that ETI will use radio signals? - LJK - 12/17/2004 1:05:07 PM
        
        Directional beaming & beaconing to emerging civs - p - 12/17/2004 3:08:08 PM
        
        As you might have guessed, I have thought about this topic - R.L. - 12/18/2004 8:43:26 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Space/Science

The whole thread (30 posts)