What should astronomers do if they detect what might be a message from intelligent beings from outer space?
The following is a reprint of an article which appeared in the
May/June issue of Technology Review. The article was written by
Stephen Strauss, a science reporter for the Toronto Globe and
Mail.
------------------------------------------------------------
What should astronomers do if they detect what might be a
message from intelligent beings from outer space? Who should
they tell first?
Priciples of scientific openness should guide all responses to
outer-space signals, according to an international group that
includes a space lawyer, astronomers, and the director of the
U.S. State Department's Office of Advanced Technology. After
four years of debate, the group formally presented an
international protocol for such occasions at an International
Astronomical Congress meeting in Bangalore, India, in October
1988.
"Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence" (SETI) projects assume
that coherent radio signals from outer space must be either
beacons from civilizations wishing to attract attention or
unplanned evidence of technical competence. But SETI astronomers
have long worried that some officials might see a potential for
political or technological gain in being the first to reply to
aliens. Such politicians might try to keep discoveries of
incomming signals secret. Messages would also need decoding, and
bringing in professional code breakers could enmesh the response
to extraterrestrials in the world of espionage.
Georgetown University law professor Allan Goodman has argued
since 1984 for international rules of conduct to keep SETI signal
analysis from becoming a political football. Peter Boyce,
executive director of the American Astronomical Society, adds,
"We want to circumvent political fiat" that would prevent a
discovery from reaching the global scientific community. Both
Boyce and Goodman are among the authors of the report.
Scientists have also been concerned that unverified alerts might
panic the public. News of a SETI event might lead to
embarrassment as well, because the signals could turn out to have
a less-than-glamorous origin.
In fact, since the first formal SETI searches began in 1960 at
the National Radio Astronomy Observatory at Greenbank, W. Va., a
number of "false positives" have been reported. These anomalies
have appeared so unique, that an alien civilization has seemed
the only explanation. Perhaps the most famous example is a
strong signal recorded in 1977 at Ohio State University. A team
member wrote "wow" next to his notes, lending that name to such
phenomena. The Ohio State wow never reappeared.
Boyce appends a related problem. "We need a breathing spell to
avoid being duped by Caltech undergraduates," he says. Those
students have made a name for thenselves by perpatrating hoaxes.
VERIFY AND TRUST
The proposal addresses verification issues first. Those who
discover a signal would strive to eliminate the possibility that
a natural or human source had emitted it. If they succeeded,
they would notify national authorities such as NASA that
something significant had been found. They would also inform
research organizations that sign the treaty, who would attempt to
independently confirm the finding, or provide an alternate
explanation.
If the scientists at these organizations agree that some
extraterrestrial intelligence is the likely source of the signal,
they would notify the astronomical community at large, the
United Nations, and space-law bodies, such as the International
Union of Space Law in Paris. Only after this would the
discoverers go public with their finding, assuming that the
secret had not leaked out already.
While secrecy is necessary during the verification process, the
protocol places a high priority on ensuring open access to SETI
information. The protocol would bind signatories to record and
permanently store all data relating to a signal. Moreover,
researchers would make data generally available in a variety of
formats.
Because replying is a political act, the protocol adds that no
single nation should control the answer. It states that "no
response to a signal or other evidence of extraterrestrial
intelligence will be sent until appropriate international
consultations have taken place." Specifically, the accord looks
to a proposal presented at a 1987 meeting of the congress of the
International Astronomical Federation, which suggests making all
responses on behalf of humanity as a whole. And any
communication to outer space must be peaceful, truthful, and
express tolerance of differences.
Over the next four years, a number of scientific and space-law
bodies will consider the Bangalore proposal. The authors hope to
present it to the United Nations before Columbus Day 1992. On
that date, NASA hopes to begin a $90 million SETI program that
will sweep the skies looking for wow indicators from all
directions, as well as radio signals from the 1,000 closest
sun-type stars.
May/June issue of Technology Review. The article was written by
Stephen Strauss, a science reporter for the Toronto Globe and
Mail.
------------------------------------------------------------
What should astronomers do if they detect what might be a
message from intelligent beings from outer space? Who should
they tell first?
Priciples of scientific openness should guide all responses to
outer-space signals, according to an international group that
includes a space lawyer, astronomers, and the director of the
U.S. State Department's Office of Advanced Technology. After
four years of debate, the group formally presented an
international protocol for such occasions at an International
Astronomical Congress meeting in Bangalore, India, in October
1988.
"Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence" (SETI) projects assume
that coherent radio signals from outer space must be either
beacons from civilizations wishing to attract attention or
unplanned evidence of technical competence. But SETI astronomers
have long worried that some officials might see a potential for
political or technological gain in being the first to reply to
aliens. Such politicians might try to keep discoveries of
incomming signals secret. Messages would also need decoding, and
bringing in professional code breakers could enmesh the response
to extraterrestrials in the world of espionage.
Georgetown University law professor Allan Goodman has argued
since 1984 for international rules of conduct to keep SETI signal
analysis from becoming a political football. Peter Boyce,
executive director of the American Astronomical Society, adds,
"We want to circumvent political fiat" that would prevent a
discovery from reaching the global scientific community. Both
Boyce and Goodman are among the authors of the report.
Scientists have also been concerned that unverified alerts might
panic the public. News of a SETI event might lead to
embarrassment as well, because the signals could turn out to have
a less-than-glamorous origin.
In fact, since the first formal SETI searches began in 1960 at
the National Radio Astronomy Observatory at Greenbank, W. Va., a
number of "false positives" have been reported. These anomalies
have appeared so unique, that an alien civilization has seemed
the only explanation. Perhaps the most famous example is a
strong signal recorded in 1977 at Ohio State University. A team
member wrote "wow" next to his notes, lending that name to such
phenomena. The Ohio State wow never reappeared.
Boyce appends a related problem. "We need a breathing spell to
avoid being duped by Caltech undergraduates," he says. Those
students have made a name for thenselves by perpatrating hoaxes.
VERIFY AND TRUST
The proposal addresses verification issues first. Those who
discover a signal would strive to eliminate the possibility that
a natural or human source had emitted it. If they succeeded,
they would notify national authorities such as NASA that
something significant had been found. They would also inform
research organizations that sign the treaty, who would attempt to
independently confirm the finding, or provide an alternate
explanation.
If the scientists at these organizations agree that some
extraterrestrial intelligence is the likely source of the signal,
they would notify the astronomical community at large, the
United Nations, and space-law bodies, such as the International
Union of Space Law in Paris. Only after this would the
discoverers go public with their finding, assuming that the
secret had not leaked out already.
While secrecy is necessary during the verification process, the
protocol places a high priority on ensuring open access to SETI
information. The protocol would bind signatories to record and
permanently store all data relating to a signal. Moreover,
researchers would make data generally available in a variety of
formats.
Because replying is a political act, the protocol adds that no
single nation should control the answer. It states that "no
response to a signal or other evidence of extraterrestrial
intelligence will be sent until appropriate international
consultations have taken place." Specifically, the accord looks
to a proposal presented at a 1987 meeting of the congress of the
International Astronomical Federation, which suggests making all
responses on behalf of humanity as a whole. And any
communication to outer space must be peaceful, truthful, and
express tolerance of differences.
Over the next four years, a number of scientific and space-law
bodies will consider the Bangalore proposal. The authors hope to
present it to the United Nations before Columbus Day 1992. On
that date, NASA hopes to begin a $90 million SETI program that
will sweep the skies looking for wow indicators from all
directions, as well as radio signals from the 1,000 closest
sun-type stars.
Comments
Post a Comment