Trappist-1 - did we really search it?

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Trappist-1 - did we really search it?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile Raistmer
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 01
Posts: 5809
Credit: 76,092,777
RAC: 51,414
Russia
Message 1850594 - Posted: 22 Feb 2017, 18:49:23 UTC

In NASA's pressconference there was statement that SETI already listen this system and got no signal.

How much did we really listen it?
SETI apps news
We're not gonna fight them. We're gonna transcend them.
ID: 1850594 · Report as offensive
Profile Mr. KevvyCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 1717
Credit: 374,880,224
RAC: 513,923
Canada
Message 1850595 - Posted: 22 Feb 2017, 18:53:26 UTC - in response to Message 1850594.  
Last modified: 22 Feb 2017, 18:53:39 UTC

IHow much did we really listen it?


Given what we now know to be there, I think the answer must be:
"Not nearly enough."

Hard to starboard on the Robert C. Byrd, mateys. :^)
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.”
--- Margaret Mead

ID: 1850595 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 40048
Credit: 34,893,063
RAC: 65,177
United Kingdom
Message 1850730 - Posted: 23 Feb 2017, 7:48:16 UTC

And Roger the cabin boy :^)
ID: 1850730 · Report as offensive
Profile Tobias Strohschneider

Send message
Joined: 30 Apr 07
Posts: 1
Credit: 947,794
RAC: 692
Germany
Message 1850833 - Posted: 23 Feb 2017, 19:12:45 UTC - in response to Message 1850730.  

Does anybody know if there is still non-analyzed data for the Trappist-1 Region left? If this would be the case, maybe the data could be priorized for analyzing?
ID: 1850833 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 2275
Credit: 1,928,692
RAC: 135
Message 1851163 - Posted: 25 Feb 2017, 6:22:15 UTC - in response to Message 1850833.  

First of all, spell your word correctly.
ID: 1851163 · Report as offensive
Profile Mr. KevvyCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 1717
Credit: 374,880,224
RAC: 513,923
Canada
Message 1851502 - Posted: 26 Feb 2017, 3:47:21 UTC - in response to Message 1851163.  
Last modified: 26 Feb 2017, 3:52:33 UTC

First of all, spell your word correctly.


Thiss foreum iz yoozed buy peeple fraum awl owever Urth, phor whoom Nglish mae knot bee they're furst langwaje. Sew yew shud bee aybull tew handel erors wihtout caling thm owt awnn itt... att leest thy ar tryng.
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.”
--- Margaret Mead

ID: 1851502 · Report as offensive
Profile JakeTheDog
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 13
Posts: 138
Credit: 2,302,916
RAC: 317
United States
Message 1851511 - Posted: 26 Feb 2017, 4:36:18 UTC
Last modified: 26 Feb 2017, 5:06:28 UTC

I'd also like to know what has been done and what is yet to be done with listening to this star. I went to the SETI Institute's webpage and there is a video of a discussion. I am watching it now, maybe it has the answers.
https://www.seti.org/facebooklive-2017-trappist-1

Edit: So the vid mentions that SETI has listened to that system, but no signals were detected. With the new announcement, they will continue to look at this star. Since it's 40 light years away, our ordinary transmissions should be able to be received by anyone with the right equipment over there. No good answer as to why we wouldn't hear anything if there was intelligent life there. But one point made was that if our transmissions from 1940's was powerful enough to reach them, if they send something back, it would get to us in the 2020's.
ID: 1851511 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 2275
Credit: 1,928,692
RAC: 135
Message 1851598 - Posted: 26 Feb 2017, 14:53:53 UTC - in response to Message 1851502.  
Last modified: 26 Feb 2017, 15:03:55 UTC

Perhaps correct there and next you are beating me on the other thing, but I read the Wikipedia article before posting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRAPPIST-1

Here it states that this discovery was made on 22 February 2017.

Using the European date and time format here, since it is written so.

I read the Wikipedia article either the next day, or perhaps two before posting and had never heard about TRAPPIST-1 before.

As an astronomer myself, I happen to make a red dwarf a cold place for living.

Perhaps some people are confused about this, but the Sun itself is a main sequence star, but still is called a dwarf star at times, when compared with others.

Except for white dwarfs and other exotic objects in space, red dwarfs like Barnard's star, Wolf 359 and Trappist-1 are not main sequence stars, but the secondary component of
alpha Centauri, or B, for short, is a main sequence star, but of spectral type K1 V.

Except for giant and supergiant stars, I have yet to know of any main sequence star with a spectral type of M.

Perhaps someone could tell me, or give some advice, but next thinking, I could be wrong, but would need the big manual for this in my shelf.

There should be a difference between that of seeing UFO's everywhere in the sky and still think that life could be present anywhere.

The Drake equation only tells about a given probability when measured against a given total, or perhaps something else.

Of course I am open for possibilities, but still do not think that life is possible everywhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoW8Tf7hTGA

This YouTube video was being played a short while ago and when next playing back, I apparently missed the start, but next recall the music.

In my opinion such a thing as intelligence could be found in space itself, but the sad fact is that we could still be left with movies like Star Wars and
Encyclopaedia Galactica for such a thing.

Having life developing on the surface of a planet is only one option among many, because we think that such things as water and air are necessary for this to be happening.

Here we should be reminded of the possible stone planet freely floating in space.

Read around a bit, including at BOINC and next the fact that not only a given probability could be a given factor, but also a couple of other things as well.

Such a thing as Religion and Faith should not be forgotten either, despite a couple of misnomers.

The old post once being made which was having a syntax or syntactic error, later fixed, gave mentioning about given possibilities and next that such a thing could perhaps be offered.

Anyway, since it comes up in my mind, what about some other discussions of the past, including that of both a way of given approach and also a similar way of thinking?

In my opinion we do not see any relation between that of evolution and the Drake equation, but once again could perhaps think that both are only single or separate answers to a more complex question.

Einstein could perhaps be making the subject of time his main study, but still we are supposed to relate this subject with that of gravity.

Read my two or so posts at Climateprediction.net where I am questioning the possible missing facts when it comes to our understanding of the Fundamental Laws of Physics and also the fact that
Einstein probably was not mentioned there.

Such a thing as hyperspace or even that of Wormholes could be speculation for now, but the story around is that such thing as UFO's probably found their way inside Black Holes for their own sake.

Next who supposedly told such a story?

Reminds me about the "Missing link" in our knowledge about our evolution, which means a given ancestry, or perhaps that of Lucy.

More about this after checking.
ID: 1851598 · Report as offensive
Profile Raistmer
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 01
Posts: 5809
Credit: 76,092,777
RAC: 51,414
Russia
Message 1851865 - Posted: 27 Feb 2017, 16:27:07 UTC - in response to Message 1851598.  
Last modified: 27 Feb 2017, 16:39:54 UTC

"cold" or"warm" to live depends not only on spectral class of the star but mostly from distance to the star.
I would say "too warm" for us on Mercury or too cold on Neptune. No matter that both orbiting same star as our Earth.
The pecularity of this discovery is the 3 planets happened to be in "life zone" of that particular star (with correction on its different spectral class already made). Life zone is area with expected mean ambient temperature on planet surface near zero Celsius.
Of course it depends on the particular atmosphere (if any) (compare Earth and Venus) but it's good estimate to start with.
Such placement makes this particular system on the top list of candidates to habitable planets and natural candidate for especially attentive listening for artifical signals as well.

P.S. from photosynthesis point of view red stars could be even more preferable than our Sun's G one. Red light (~600nm) is sufficient for Earth's PS1/2-based plants to make initial charge separation. Shorter waves required mostly for process control and such control mechanisms could easely be adapted to other spectral pecularities. So, having spectral maximum on longer wavelength could make photosynthesis performance even higher.
SETI apps news
We're not gonna fight them. We're gonna transcend them.
ID: 1851865 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 2275
Credit: 1,928,692
RAC: 135
Message 1851877 - Posted: 27 Feb 2017, 17:45:48 UTC - in response to Message 1851865.  
Last modified: 27 Feb 2017, 17:49:26 UTC

Perhaps correct in that assumption, Raistmer.

But then you would next need to have at least an atmosphere on such a planet and also water as well, which reminds me that life here on Earth originated in the oceans.

Or perhaps I rather could say possible planet above, since we still could be made to choose between the star itself and the seven or so planets orbiting it.

If this happens to be true, it would be a quite spectacular discovery and not necessarily one easy to make either.
ID: 1851877 · Report as offensive
Profile Raistmer
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 01
Posts: 5809
Credit: 76,092,777
RAC: 51,414
Russia
Message 1851913 - Posted: 27 Feb 2017, 20:51:02 UTC - in response to Message 1851877.  

Regarding origins of life on Earth there is one (among lots of others btw) theory that most appropriate conditions were at surroundings of geothermal geysers.
Periodical change in environment and appropriate salts contents, temperature regimes make them suitable for initial biochemistry synthesis.
SETI apps news
We're not gonna fight them. We're gonna transcend them.
ID: 1851913 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 2275
Credit: 1,928,692
RAC: 135
Message 1851940 - Posted: 27 Feb 2017, 22:53:52 UTC - in response to Message 1851913.  
Last modified: 27 Feb 2017, 23:17:57 UTC

That is a very good point.

The fact is that we could at times be speaking about diversity on Earth, but still be looking at such things as crystals or minerals.

The Wikipedia makes of both these as natural products, although that of minerals could more easy be thought of as such.

The classic example when it comes to such a thing as early or primitive life of the sea, or ocean, is that ofTrilobites.

For a more developed species currently living in the sea, we are having the Octopus for such a thing.

But the sad fact is that when we possibly make a difference between that of plankton for which there could be some two different types for such, namely that of plant and animal plankton,
as soon as such a thing develops any further and gets a brain on its own, rather than being one-celled organisms, there becomes even more to it and we probably should know much of that story.

One thing is that of the beginning of life here on Earth is supposed to be by means of such a thing as bacteria and viruses.

But the fact is that there could also be a story around being told which could be related to that of possible technology, including those which could be not that of ours.

As an astronomer myself, I was therefore a bit reluctant at getting involved in any such discussion, because there could be both pros and cons with such a thing, as you may well know.

Look at the celestial sky like what I happened to do this evening, namely by visiting the area around the recent discovery without locating the star directly.

Still I am back at the fact that while there are both stars and galaxies in the field, the background is not completely dark and from a bit of experience, I know that this is not only dust and gas in the Milky Way.

I mentioned this before and when perhaps looking at such a thing as Creation, including that of the Big Bang for such a thing, we should not forget what we could be dealing with.

Definitely life could be present and found here on Earth both at land and at sea and also in the air.

We could be left with that of a given technology as a possible option, or for a given use, because we could be left to wish for some other than ourself being present.

Those things which possibly might not be detected are not necessarily such things as Command Ships in space, but except for that we could be left at believing in possible angels for such a thing.

The question becomes whether any given Law or Equation could be defined for such a thing as evolution and whether any such a thing could next be related to something else in a given way.

My guess is that any order out of such a thing as randomness and chaos might only be defined in the same way for both or all when it comes to that of mathematics itself.

Therefore we could still be left with this subject in order to perhaps explain why life could be either such a thing as bacteria or viruses, or maybe plants, or perhaps something else or other.

A given path of evolution could be as a result of order out of chaos, but for some reason we could perhaps believe that there could be other reasons behind.

The possible difference between that of Creation and that of a possible Creator is that of Matter Creation versus a given Creation Myth and for the latter, we should know both the debate for this, as well as
the specific words for the same context which could be used.

Now I am off for tonight after climbing my RAC a bit.

Back tomorrow.
ID: 1851940 · Report as offensive
John McCallum
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 04
Posts: 850
Credit: 452,383
RAC: 110
United Kingdom
Message 1857659 - Posted: 25 Mar 2017, 18:16:07 UTC
Last modified: 25 Mar 2017, 18:24:08 UTC

Sorry to a bearer of bad tidings but all the planets around Trappest-1 are/may be/perhaps tidally locked so roasted on one face deep frozen on the other.https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.05815
Old enough to know better(but)still young enough not to care
ID: 1857659 · Report as offensive

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Trappist-1 - did we really search it?


 
©2017 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.