Q&A about the ATA shutdown.

Assuming I didn't blow it all on ninja supermodel robots first.

Assuming I didn't blow it all on ninja supermodel robots first.

Hoo-boy... Eric, I thought you signed all those papers agreeing not to blow my cover!

Eric, thanks for this thread and that on the front page is a note. Maybe sticky there for a few weeks?

And let the misinformation begin. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=63890&nowrap=true#1100901 Dirk has pointed us to a German website that talks of the closing but shows the S@H screensaver. This is disturbing in that people are very likely to think they are one and the same.

And later on in that article, it is "stated" that SETI@home is working on ATA data.

So much for the accurateness of journalistic investigation :-(

Gruß,
Gundolf

I can only hope that other crunchers think the same way you do, and check the forums here after hearing such misleading news.
____________
"By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible". Hebrews 11.3

This article reinforces my opinion that journalists are not able to grasp the difference between SETI@home and SETI Institute.
Tullio

Does this mean the Green Bank data is unlikely to appear, given the budget constraints, or is that still going ahead? There was some talk of using data from Parkes too.

The Green Bank data is sure to happen. The splitter and any client changes necessary to handle it are a bit farther in the future. If one or more of us has to go working less time, it would slow down, but not stop.

The Astropulse reobservations at Arecibo are sure to happen as well.

There aren't any solid commitments as far as Parkes goes. At least none that I'm aware of.

Assuming I didn't blow it all on ninja supermodel robots first.

Hoo-boy... Eric, I thought you signed all those papers agreeing not to blow my cover!

Then get back to hiding in the shadows!

There are several reason that SETI@home isn't associated with the SETI Institute. The first is that when SETI@home started, some people at the SETI Institute were worried that SETI@home might generate bad publicity for them if something went badly. So they wanted SETI@home to remain separate.

Second, the SETI Institute has its own instruments and observes nearby stars using long observation times rather than doing an all sky survey like SETI@home. So in general, our methods don't fit in with their philosophy.

We have, at times, tried to negotiate joint fund raising efforts with them. These efforts usually break down over dividing revenue between institutions, and whether the SETI Institute would have access to our database of email addresses. The Institute solicits donations much more aggressively than we do, and we're not sure our volunteers would like that. In addition, our privacy policy says we aren't going to give private info to anyone, and we aren't going to violate that. But we will probably be forced to solicit donations more frequently than once a year to stay afloat. Hope we don't end up like NPR with pledge drives every three weeks.

Since we don't do the same thing, it's unlikely there would be any efficiency gains from becoming a part of the SETI institute. What we would gain is access to their fund raising staff. But it's unclear whether the Institute could or would promise to keep us funded.
____________

Thank you for taking the time to explain all this Eric. Very enlightening! But to give me a leg up, and so I don't fall behind, please keep me abreast of the ninja supermodel robot situation.
(Can they be programmed to do laundry??)

We'd need to build a data recorder capable of pulling in all of the beams. A replica of the one that we have at AO would suffice. And, of course, we'd need some support from personnel at the telescope, and an approval through the proposal process. And, of course, someone here would need to free up the time to handle it, or an Australian astronomer could help make it happen. There doesn't seem to be much in the way of SETI funding in Australia, from what I understand.

____________