Nevermind Where. *When* Are the Intelligent Aliens?

By Seth Shostak | October 25, 2011 5:49 pm

Only a few decades back, there were serious scientists who thought that planets might be miraculous. Not miracles like a burning bush or a docile teenager, but highly improbable objects. These researchers figured that the conditions necessary for making small, cold worlds could be rare—perhaps extremely rare. Most stars were believed to live their luminous lives alone, bereft of planetary accompaniment.

Well, those thoughts have been banished. In the last 15 years, hard-working astronomers have found many hundreds of so-called exoplanets around nearby stars, and NASA’s Kepler telescope is set to uncover thousands more. (If you don’t know this already, you’ve probably reached this site by mistake. But you’ve come this far already, so keep reading.) Kepler’s principal task is to find habitable exoplanets—worlds with solid surfaces at the right distance from their host star to sport temperatures amenable to the presence of watery oceans and protective atmospheres—planets that might be very much like Earth (depending on some other factors that are harder to measure from light-years away, like geology and chemistry).

Kepler has already found about five dozen candidate objects that, while somewhat larger than our own, seem to meet these criteria. As this space-based telescope continues to peer into the heavens, more such planets will emerge from the data. Indeed, it seems a good bet to guess that at least a few percent of all stars are blessed with “habitable” worlds. That would tally to billions of life-friendly sites, just in our galaxy. This has already prompted SETI scientists to swing their antennas in the directions Kepler’s most promising candidate planets, hoping to pick up the ABCs and MTVs of alien worlds. After all, these systems are arguably the best targets that SETI (the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) has ever had. It’s like discovering a prolific fishing hole.

But there’s a fly in the ointment: While eavesdropping on a small bunch of star systems known to have terrestrial-style worlds is better than taking your chances with random targets, it’s not actually that much better. The reason is simple. The oldest confirmed fossils on Earth are about 3.5 billion years old, and there’s indirect, if sketchy, evidence for life going back 4 billion years. That’s roughly 90 percent of the age of the Earth, which is to say that biology bedecked our planet very early. Life seems to have been an easy chemistry experiment. So that’s yet more encouragement, as it hints that many of those habitable worlds will actually be inhabited. There could be life on billions of planets in the Milky Way.

Yet on Earth, it’s only in the last few instants of geologic time that biology has spat out Homo sapiens, which is, as far as we know, the first terrestrial species to successfully build a radio transmitter. So it seems that alien SETI researchers—the Klingons and Vulcans and whoever else is out there—could have spun their telescopes in our direction for billions of years without getting any signal (no intelligent life indeed). Yes, they might know that Earth was a kind and gentle world, blessed by air and oceans. And yes, they might have detected the oxygen in our atmosphere, and concluded that our planet has life. But intelligent life? They wouldn’t know, unless they’ve been monitoring the Earth very, very recently.

There’s one more thing to consider, namely how long we will continue to broadcast our presence. It’s hard to say, given our apparent vulnerability to self-destruction via advanced weaponry, environmental catastrophe, or some other horror. But let’s give ourselves the benefit of the beneficent doubt and assume that humans hang around a million years—approximately as long as the average species does. Even if we transmit all that time, there’s still only one chance in 5,000 that someone examining our planet at a random moment in cosmic history will find a sign of intelligence on Earth. I might point out that these depressingly small odds are, in reality, likely to be even smaller.

So the bottom line is that Earth-like worlds are not enough to significantly increase SETI’s chances of success until, and unless, we find many, many thousands of them. And that’s a project for the next generation of planet-hunting hardware. Yes, finding habitable exoplanets is tremendously interesting, and a big psychological boon in our quest for cosmic company. But just because we’ve located a few oases in the desert doesn’t mean we’ll soon discover the Bedouins.

 

Seth Shostak is Senior Astronomer at the SETI Institute in California, and the host of the weekly radio show and podcast, “Big Picture Science.”

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Top Posts
  • Terry A. Davis

    Go to TempleOS and use tongues to hear from God. God says, “multitudes pluckest Victor disapproved prevented require
    haughtiness loveth multiplicity mark-up three welcome
    fervid miracles redeemer incense Orations depraved Perish
    harmoniseth effaced heaped self-will But Being master
    you’re_fired Manichee alternately Galatians Ten 99 gratuitous
    one-third thread pertaining These courage kicking imply
    class cleaved flashes boy despairing temptation “

    • okonomiyaki3000

      That sounds super interesting but I can’t comprehend any of it. Could you try again in plain English?

      • albeit

        Sounds like it was already translated…by computer.

  • okonomiyaki3000

    There is little chance that we will be broadcasting signals that extraterrestrials would notice as signs of intelligence for millions of years. Hundreds of years is already extremely unlikely. Within a fairly short time nearly everything will be encrypted. An encrypted signal looks like noise. Same goes for any ET transmissions, no matter how long their civilizations exist, the period of time in which they would be broadcasting anything we would notice is extremely short. And so SETI will never find anything.

    • albeit

      Aren’t 1s and 0s still 1s and 0s, even if a message is encrypted?

      • Will Hughes

        All signals are analog, we interpret them as digital such that a signal above a certain strength is considered ‘on’ (1) and below it is ‘off’ (0). (I’m simplifying here quite a bit).

        If you look at the output of a Pulsar (a type of Neutron star) – you’ll see very regular pulses of light, or radio waves or some other type of radiation – these distinct signals could be interpreted as binary, but they don’t mean anything. They’re just on/off/on/off as the star rotates.

      • okonomiyaki3000

        What Will Huges said. Plus, keep in mind that SETI is picking up “ones and zeros” all the time but it’s just noise. They’re looking for some kind of pattern that fits within certain parameters. An encrypted signal will never meet those qualifications, it is indistinguishable from the usual noise.

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

The Crux

A collection of bright and big ideas about timely and important science from a community of experts.
ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT
Collapse bottom bar
+

Login to your Account

X
E-mail address:
Password:
Remember me
Forgot your password?
No problem. Click here to have it e-mailed to you.

Not Registered Yet?

Register now for FREE. Registration only takes a few minutes to complete. Register now »