2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.futures.2009.04.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The future of SETI: Finite effort or search without end?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
(29 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This extended perspective now brings clearly into view the closely-related multi-disciplinary 'sibling' fields of SETI, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (e.g., Ekers et al 2002;Harrison 2009;Morrison, Billingham & Wolfe 1979;Shklovskii & Sagan 1966;Tarter 2001Tarter , 2004Tarter et al 2010), and Astrobiology, the study of how life might arise and evolve in the Universe (e.g., Chyba & Hand 2005;Domagal-Goldman et al 2016;Mix et al 2006). In this expanded conception, then, we are-here on our "pale blue dot" (Sagan 1995)-simply a single 'element' (in the language of set theory) of what may be a set of intelligent technology-using civilisations, which itself forms a sub-set of intelligent lifeforms in general (i.e., not necessarily technology-using), which itself forms a sub-set of lifeforms in general (i.e., not necessarily intelligent), which arise on places/planets where lifeforms could arise (i.e., habitable planets, in general).…”
Section: Astrobiology Setimentioning
confidence: 97%
“…This extended perspective now brings clearly into view the closely-related multi-disciplinary 'sibling' fields of SETI, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (e.g., Ekers et al 2002;Harrison 2009;Morrison, Billingham & Wolfe 1979;Shklovskii & Sagan 1966;Tarter 2001Tarter , 2004Tarter et al 2010), and Astrobiology, the study of how life might arise and evolve in the Universe (e.g., Chyba & Hand 2005;Domagal-Goldman et al 2016;Mix et al 2006). In this expanded conception, then, we are-here on our "pale blue dot" (Sagan 1995)-simply a single 'element' (in the language of set theory) of what may be a set of intelligent technology-using civilisations, which itself forms a sub-set of intelligent lifeforms in general (i.e., not necessarily technology-using), which itself forms a sub-set of lifeforms in general (i.e., not necessarily intelligent), which arise on places/planets where lifeforms could arise (i.e., habitable planets, in general).…”
Section: Astrobiology Setimentioning
confidence: 97%
“…This may be false, as many buildings on Earth, such as skyscapers, serve double duty as office buildings and antenna carriers. Determining the actual communication costs, without the commercial part, is not trivial, and will be relevant for future SETI efforts with maturing technology (Harrison, 2009).…”
Section: Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This more active 'stance' could conceivably influence the timing of any potential contact to some degree, although proposals to do so are considered quite controversial, having strongly-argued positions both pro and con [see, e.g., 44], owing to the risky possibility that an intelligent, proximal (e.g., solar neighbourhood) entity might also be belligerent/malevolent-hazardous. The suggestion for SETI to remain in the passive stance to avoid this possibly-existential risk is sometimes referred to in the SETI literature as the prudence of 'refraining from "shouting out into the jungle" before we know what is out there' [e.g., 5, p. 163].…”
Section: Other Possible Additions To the Parameter Spacementioning
confidence: 99%