I am getting the impression that its all about the pole position of the participants rather than the science. Where can you see the actual science being done.

---

For many of the end-users, stats are very important (myself included). However, that being said, the science is the most important aspect of the entire project I agree, and I do believe that this website is due for an update which will add many missing features, and that might be one of them.

---

I for one, agree with the initiator and wish we were still getting some idea if we had come at all close to doing the data block that detects "something" - maybe like the old stats you'd get with the SETI Classic window when yoy opened it either to check on what you found or to hypnotize yourself watching theprogression of bars of light.

While I'll donate every spare cycle I've got to SETI or another project that should be government-funded (while the treasury and our own pockets are being looted for the benefit of Bush cronies, Big Oil and to pay for the extinction of Iraq with American lives and dollars), I cannot see *buying* a number cruncher so I can rev up my SETI score! Given recent outages, I think one would be better off buying SETI-Berkeley a box like one I saw advertised today - takes something like 46 SATA drives (just plug 'em in, connector side down) and it handles @18 TBytes of data at Raid 10 on fiber links. Better than the hand-me-downs they're stuck with. I bet they'd make the donor User of the Week of Year.

Let's face it, when several "users" are generous IP folks who turn over every spare cycle on the 20,000 PCs they rule, along with servers, number crunchers, whatever that a short-sighted company uses 9-5, 5 days a week, you are not going to "win". By sticking with things since SETI was announced, and I first started sharing resources of my 16-MHz '386, I've managed to remain in the 89th percentile, or so - just stay loyal, and use the numbers to report donation in kind if you have enough taxes to itemize.

-dmr

For many of the end-users, stats are very important (myself included). However, that being said, the science is the most important aspect of the entire project I agree, and I do believe that this website is due for an update which will add many missing features, and that might be one of them.

---

"Here comes a candle to light you to bed" - Big Brother came a little late, and not from the government but from DoubleClick and other InfoThieves and Brokers: Fight 'em, Ban 'em Make 'em shred the file with your "impersonal" name and address on it!

I agree with you that I would also like to see some "results", however I have been doing quite a bit of "information searching" and have found that the way the project works is that it is a long and complicated process to actually "find" something. There are many many "hits" or signals that show up. Most of them are of known "noise" signals such as airplanes, spacecraft and satelites, etc. The signal has known characteristics that can be used to eliminate them from the "possibles". Then there are signals that are "possibles" that don't fit any known signal type or source. These are entered into a database. The database contains the exact date and time that the signal was received along with the exact point in the sky that the antenna was pointed to at the time. When someone crunches another wu where the telescope is looking at the exact same point in the sky on a different date, there are two things that can happen. They either don't find a signal or they do. If they don't find a signal nothing much happens. But if they do, then information on that signal is compared to the first. After several "hits" on the same signal from the same point in the sky at different times, that signal is tagged for further study. Every year or so the project scientists take a trip out to the telescope and have their own share of actual time at the telescope. They will take this list of signals and point the telescope back to it's source and do a much deeper scan. If they still hear the signal and they can detect anything about the signal that does not sound like interstellar noise, then we have a possible "contact", however so far this has not happened. There have been instances of signals being picked up and verified but on closer examination they either fail to reappear or are eliminated as being a false signal from some other source. So it would be nice if we could get a little feedback as to the number of 'hits" that are good enough to be entered as a candidate for further study, it would be a long time from the time one (or a quorum) of us detects a signal until it is either proved or disproved.
Jim

---

Jim

Some people plan their life out and look back at the wealth they've had.
Others live life day by day and look back at the wealth of experiences and enjoyment they've had.

An answer (or part there of) is now contained in the Seti future plans area.

---

My movie https://vimeo.com/manage/videos/502242