[X] My Assistant

[nprev]

Well, that's good--if not exciting--news.

SETI is important, of course, even if the results are forever negative. If we found even ONE civilization intentionally broadcasting for detection (which seemingly is the fundamental attribution bias of SETI research), that datum would have enormous probable statistical implications...I mean, we don't do it, nor in my opinion are we ever likely to over the span of time required to garner the slightest hope of success, so why should anyone else?

Given that, I am afraid that if we survive long enough to conduct actual interstellar exploration (UM or MSF), we may well stumble upon some worlds in which the native intelligent species killed itself off as a result of failing to master many of the same daunting challenges our species faces today.

I believe that life is common throughout the Universe; I submit that wisdom and foresight may not be.

[nprev]

Resurrecting a thread...looks like a passive (i.e., not relying on intentional transmissions) SETI detection instrument is about to start up. This seems like the smart way to go, imho.

http://planetary.org/news/2007/0110_SETI_R...esdropping.html

[Guest_MarkG_*]

I believe that life is common throughout the Universe; I submit that wisdom and foresight may not be.

Given that it would appear that we can colonise the entire galaxy in a million years or so with no technology more than a few centuries ahead of us, and technology a thousand years or so ahead would allow us to perform engineering feats that would be visible from a very long distance (e.g. blowing up stars for raw materials), I think it's a safe bet that there aren't any technologically advanced aliens out there. While I've contributed vast amounts of CPU time to SETI@home, I can't help but feel that if there was another technological civilisation even ten thousand years ahead of us, it should be about as difficult for us to detect as for a cave-man to detect technological life from Central Park.

The real question, I agree, is whether we're the first, or whether others wiped themselves out?

[nprev]

I think you're right; that is a very fundamental question, but a great deal of supplementary data is needed to formulate a meaningful answer.

We have no actual evidence that the evolution of life itself is an inevitability, much less intelligence. We are lucky to live in the first period of human history where at least some sort of relevant statistical constraints on these questions may be derived, and that is the real value of projects such as Seti@Home.

Fermi's Paradox is valid, but only if a multitude of ancillary assumptions/hypotheses are also valid. This fact in itself may well prove Fermi's idea...unless we disprove it ourselves by colonizing the galaxy!