Exo-Astrosociology and the Search for Technosignatures

Abstract

The search for extraterrestrial societies on exoplanets, exomoons, and artificial structures has thus far proven unsuccessful. Nevertheless, astrosociology focuses on the human dimension of space exploration, which involves everything humanity discovers in space, and that includes nonhuman sentient life, which is the focus here. At this point in human history, the search itself is the focus by necessity as are all of the methodologies employed to increase the likelihood of such a discovery. Even if the eventual discovery of an extraterrestrial civilization is unlikely, astrosociologists, like astrobiologists and SETI scientists, must assume it is a likely outcome. Therefore, the efforts focusing on finding technosignatures are pursued. The connection between astrobiology and astrosociology lies in the basic idea that because Earth-based humans are actively searching for extraterrestrial life, it is therefore important to study how and why they participate in such activities as well as what would result if their searches discovered a nonhuman society. This essay focuses most heavily on technosignatures although other indications of life, such as biosignatures, are also relevant and thus receive some attention here. Thus, the detection of intelligent, technological life elsewhere in our universe does not fall only into the domains of astrobiology and SETI. There substantial issues that astrosociology, and more specifically the subfield of exoastrosociology, can best address. Nomenclature ARI = The Astrosociology Research Institute ET = extraterrestrial ETI = extraterrestrial intelligence ETIL = extraterrestrial intelligent life ETS = extraterrestrial society METI = Messaging to Extraterrestrial Intelligence NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration SETI = search for extraterrestrial intelligence STEM = science, technology, engineering, and mathematics STEAM = science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and the arts I. Introduction: The Difficulty of the Task XO-ASTROSOCIOLOGISTS are interested in life elsewhere in the cosmos, just like other scientists and scholars such as SETI researchers and astrobiologists as well as an untold number of those in the public sphere. Those who participate in the search itself continue to face a seemingly daunting task; namely, to detect a nonrelated genesis of life elsewhere in our universe. Paraphrasing Carl Sagan's character Ellie Arroway's statement that was famously articulated in the 1997 movie Contact: "the universe is an amazingly big place, so if it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space." With this in mind, humanity continues the search. Not surprisingly, though, the most common type of question that arises coincides with the Fermi Paradox, which corresponds to the current failure to detect evidence of extraterrestrial biology or technology, asking: Where is everybody? Where are all the nonhuman intelligent species? Relatedly, are homo sapiens truly alone? Is life on Earth a fluke or does life exist elsewhere? Is it rare or abundant? These types of ...

The social science perspective on the Fermi paradox

“…The technological level of civilization is not only a necessary condition for space exploration, colonization or interstellar communications, but it also determines the list of possible technosignaturesmanifestations of technological activity that indicate the existence of a highly developed civilization (Pass, 2019;Romanovskaya, 2022). The presence of technosignatures is an important aspect of the problem since they potentially make it possible to detect traces of the existence of civilizations from a distance and regardless of their motivation.…”

Astrosociology on Mars

“…It is defined as the study of extraterrestrially-related forms of astrosocial phenomena. It "involves how the very search for extraterrestrial life impacts humanity in a myriad of different ways" and "also involves how ongoing failure and potential success affects societies, cultures, social groups, subcultures, and individuals [77], p. 4."…”