3 ms·

This is speculative science fiction. It cites a post in a journal that is "OPEN ACCESS Research Notes of the AAS is a non-peer reviewed, indexed and secure rec

by zeagle 2y ago

This is speculative science fiction. It cites a post in a journal that is "OPEN ACCESS Research Notes of the AAS is a non-peer reviewed, indexed and secure record of works in progress, comments and clarifications, null results, or timely reports of observations in astronomy and astrophysics." ... So a blog?

cthalupa 2y ago
Speculative, sure. Fiction? As much as any other theoretical technosignature is. Does our understanding of science allow for this? At a surface level, it seems like it does. Is it likely? Who knows. The comments on this article are kind of weird. Dr. Loeb is one of the handful of scientists where SETI-style research is their bread and butter - it's not like we're throwing thousands of our best and brightest at this research at the expense of something more practical. Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field.
- zeagle 2y ago
  > Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? I guess my disdain for this field's scientific rigor shines through. When hypotheses aren't testable... > Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field. That is a fair point!
  - ofrzeta 2y ago
    I don't know. There are academics, medical doctors who believe in homeopathy or worse. So academic credentials no not automatically translate in overall rationality.
    - zeagle 2y ago
      As a physician I fully agree! There is some crazy stuff out there (and I'm sure someone has said that about my western medicine and me too.)
  - throwaway48540 2y ago
    The hypothesis is testable - we've been observing and calculating the behavior of black holes and other astronomical objects for decades. This paper is looking for stuff that is physically possible but unlikely to occur naturally. What test would you like to see, short of "yep there are aliens"?
    - zeagle 2y ago
      Is it tho? Correct me if I'm wrong but black holes, although pretty whimsical when first proposed, are an explanation for aspects of general relativity with indirectly observable phenomenon, not speculation on how aliens derive energy. It's important to recognize and push through biases and recognize there is a role for theoretical work but theoretical or particle physics is different to whatever encompasses Kardashev scales, Dyson spheres and other thought experiments. I think I'll just agree to disagree here.
KolenCh 2y ago
This is speculation, sure. You may say all theorists do are speculations. They propose ideas, show that it is falsifiable, and it is not their duty to then write proposals and come up with experiments and then take observations and only having done that in a decade to publish one single citable thing. Not to mention this signature should be looked for in an experiment that has much larger scope and can be one of the hundreds of things a single analysis has included, and might at most constitute a few sentences in a dozens-page paper. Your expectation is infeasible. Setting that expectation is irresponsible.

by zeagle 2y ago

cthalupa 2y ago

Speculative, sure. Fiction? As much as any other theoretical technosignature is. Does our understanding of science allow for this? At a surface level, it seems like it does. Is it likely? Who knows. The comments on this article are kind of weird. Dr. Loeb is one of the handful of scientists where SETI-style research is their bread and butter - it's not like we're throwing thousands of our best and brightest at this research at the expense of something more practical. Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field.

zeagle 2y ago
> Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? I guess my disdain for this field's scientific rigor shines through. When hypotheses aren't testable... > Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field. That is a fair point!
- ofrzeta 2y ago
  I don't know. There are academics, medical doctors who believe in homeopathy or worse. So academic credentials no not automatically translate in overall rationality.
  - zeagle 2y ago
    As a physician I fully agree! There is some crazy stuff out there (and I'm sure someone has said that about my western medicine and me too.)
- throwaway48540 2y ago
  The hypothesis is testable - we've been observing and calculating the behavior of black holes and other astronomical objects for decades. This paper is looking for stuff that is physically possible but unlikely to occur naturally. What test would you like to see, short of "yep there are aliens"?
  - zeagle 2y ago
    Is it tho? Correct me if I'm wrong but black holes, although pretty whimsical when first proposed, are an explanation for aspects of general relativity with indirectly observable phenomenon, not speculation on how aliens derive energy. It's important to recognize and push through biases and recognize there is a role for theoretical work but theoretical or particle physics is different to whatever encompasses Kardashev scales, Dyson spheres and other thought experiments. I think I'll just agree to disagree here.

KolenCh 2y ago

This is speculation, sure. You may say all theorists do are speculations. They propose ideas, show that it is falsifiable, and it is not their duty to then write proposals and come up with experiments and then take observations and only having done that in a decade to publish one single citable thing. Not to mention this signature should be looked for in an experiment that has much larger scope and can be one of the hundreds of things a single analysis has included, and might at most constitute a few sentences in a dozens-page paper. Your expectation is infeasible. Setting that expectation is irresponsible.