Isnt it time to move on?

---

The tapes have never been loaded in any particular order - they just get picked out of a box. It's possible these have never been processed yet.
Even if they have, the enhanced application looks at the data in greater 'depth' - it should find signals a dB or so weaker than before, so a much greater volume of space is being searched.
As for the date of recording, it really doesn't matter a jot, the signals being recieved could be 10s of years old anyway.
So as for 'moving on', we are - we're looking many years further back now.

---

Also the latest of the tapes we can crunch right now are approximately 2004. Nothing new has been recorded that we can currently do. The tape recorder died back then, and it took until now to get the money for a new one. Some new stuff just started crunching in the past month or so, but they need to make new applications for them, so that's either over at Alpha or Beta (I do not do either, so I am unsure who's doing the testing).

What's the difference if we find a signal that is 10,000+ years old, if we found it in 1999 or now? Still 10,000+ years old. We can't do much about it.

---

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

Isnt it time to move on?

we have to wait

Last week the new multi-beam data recorder was installed at Arecibo Observatory and has already taken some data. A science newsletter with more details is forthcoming.

The orininal Link

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/

i am also one of the Man who thinks crunching the old Data again, makes no Sence

enhanced or not...

Greetings from Germany NRW
Ulli

Isnt it time to move on?

The data on the tapes is from hundreds or thousands of light years away, so the signals on the tapes are quite old.

What difference does a few more years make?

Work is done in random order. The 1999 tapes were on the shelf and when the new, 2000 tapes arrived they went in front, and so on.

So, we're finally near the back of the shelf (and they may clean it out completely before we get the latest from Aricebo).

---

They have to look through all the tapes, Just because It's older doesn't mean they shouldn't look at It. Sounds like much a do about nothin to Me, As It's data that needs to be crunched folks.

---

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's

We should be seeing a trickle of 2006 data soon. We're working on the splitter and application for the new data recorder, but can't estimate ETA as yet.

Eric

---

@SETIEric@qoto.org (Mastodon)

Isnt it time to move on?

The data on the tapes is from hundreds or thousands of light years away, so the signals on the tapes are quite old.

What difference does a few more years make?

Two thousand, zero, zero...party over... oops, out of time...

---

Also the latest of the tapes we can crunch right now are approximately 2004. Nothing new has been recorded that we can currently do. The tape recorder died back then, and it took until now to get the money for a new one. Some new stuff just started crunching in the past month or so, but they need to make new applications for them, so that's either over at Alpha or Beta (I do not do either, so I am unsure who's doing the testing).

What's the difference if we find a signal that is 10,000+ years old, if we found it in 1999 or now? Still 10,000+ years old. We can't do much about it.

Not really. Remember we are looking for an artificially generated signal - Man-made, err... ET made.

Unless ET has the technology to modulate the output of an entire star, that signal will be incredibly weak and only detectable at a limited range. Effectively we are only (currently) likely able to detect a signal from a few tens, possibly 100 or so, of light-years away.

As radio waves travel at the speed of light, the oldest signal we could detect was almost certainly originated less than 100 years ago.

It doesn't matter that we're checking data 5 or 10 years old, as there is a very high likelyhood that, if we find a signal in old data, it will still be there when it is re-observed a few years later.

---

It doesn't matter that we're checking data 5 or 10 years old, as there is a very high likelyhood that, if we find a signal in old data, it will still be there when it is re-observed a few years later.

If we're looking for signals that "leaked" -- something like an intergalactic "I Love Lucy" show, there is an argument that as civilizations advance, they put more of their signals where they are, and blast less and less wasted signal to the stars.

So, a civilization that "got cable" in 2002 (adjusted for the distance travelled) won't be detectable in 2003.

---

So, a civilization that "got cable" in 2002 (adjusted for the distance travelled) won't be detectable in 2003.

Fair point, except AFAIK S@H is specifically looking at a frequency of 1420MHz - the emission frequency of Hydrogen.
The assumption is that aliens wanting to be detected will broadcast specifically on this frequency, the physics of Hydrogen being pretty fundamental. Aparantly the universe is also quietest at this frequency which ET may latch on to this.

Would we pickup I Love Lucy? Maybe, but 1420MHz is a wery specific frequency - up there between mobile phones and microwave ovens, way above what we use for TV.
And for that matter, I doubt that any inteligent race would cart around mega-watt mobiles or have leaky mega-watt microwave ovens - at least they wouldn't be around long if they did would they? ;)

It would be nice to think that we might pickup some alien SuperBowl or BlockBuster movie, but I think we're looking for megs-watt signals broadcast specifically by ET scientiets to say 'we're here' to other ET scientists, not a few kilowatts of leaking entertainment.

---

No trickle of 2006 data hear yet but I saw that their was one tape in splitter from 2006.

It would be nice to think that we might pickup some alien SuperBowl or BlockBuster movie, but I think we're looking for megs-watt signals broadcast specifically by ET scientiets to say 'we're here' to other ET scientists, not a few kilowatts of leaking entertainment.

I keep thinking of "GalaxyQuest" somehow.

Never give up, never surrender!

---

It would be nice to think that we might pickup some alien SuperBowl or BlockBuster movie, but I think we're looking for megs-watt signals broadcast specifically by ET scientiets to say 'we're here' to other ET scientists, not a few kilowatts of leaking entertainment.

I keep thinking of "GalaxyQuest" somehow.

Never give up, never surrender!

By Grapthar's Hammer...
"Rock! Rock! Rock!"

Love that movie. Not to mention all the aliens appearing in it and their nifty gadgets (and the squiddies' ethics!)...

They sure had a nicely directed electron beam. The message they sent with it was clear enough, too ;D

And yes, anyone who wants to get noticed would pump out more than a few puny KWs and try to stay in a frequency band that's least likely to be affected by general signal noise.

It's all a rather academic question - we'll know when we find a signal :o)

The news channel here ran a message once yesterday saying that a UFO had been observed near the ISS. Pause. Incredulous stare of the co-anchor. Then the first guy noticed he had left out the part where the UFO was most probably wreckage of an old spaceship that was in a decaying orbit and likely to pass within 2 kilometers of ISS, and that it was a rather serious situation (in astronomical terms, 2km is nothing, especially when something's travelling at high speed towards you).

Made for a fun double-take though :o)

Cheers,
Simon.

---

Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information

Also the latest of the tapes we can crunch right now are approximately 2004. Nothing new has been recorded that we can currently do. The tape recorder died back then, and it took until now to get the money for a new one. Some new stuff just started crunching in the past month or so, but they need to make new applications for them, so that's either over at Alpha or Beta (I do not do either, so I am unsure who's doing the testing).

What's the difference if we find a signal that is 10,000+ years old, if we found it in 1999 or now? Still 10,000+ years old. We can't do much about it.

18ap06aa.10955.306.548578.3.246 Is this from 06?

---

Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!

18ap06aa.10955.306.548578.3.246 Is this from 06?

Yup. Prepare to see lots more data from 2005/2006 coming down the pike. We recently collected the last scraps of data from the old data recorder down at Arecibo. We've been a bit hesitant in sending this work out because it's probably riddled with junk, but it's fresh and previously unanalyzed.

- Matt

---

-- BOINC/SETI@home network/web/science/development person
-- "Any idiot can have a good idea. What is hard is to do it." - Jeanne-Claude

18ap06aa.10955.306.548578.3.246 Is this from 06?

Yup. Prepare to see lots more data from 2005/2006 coming down the pike. We recently collected the last scraps of data from the old data recorder down at Arecibo. We've been a bit hesitant in sending this work out because it's probably riddled with junk, but it's fresh and previously unanalyzed.

- Matt

Hey Matt. Sorry but I can't avoid asking, why would that work probably be riddled with junk? ;)

Regards.

---

/Mav

We have lingered long enough on the shores of the cosmic ocean.
We are ready at last to set sail for the stars.
(Carl Sagan)

is there any way to know how many tapes we have left to work on? I for one don't mind looking at old data as long as we are looking at it better...after all they did find what 15 moons last year from old voyager1 and 2 pics... old data but better software :)

---

Hey Matt. Sorry but I can't avoid asking, why would that work probably be riddled with junk? ;)

Well, there is frequent transmitting going on at Arecibo, during which our receiver, which was usually left on, would be inundated with loud loud noise. We used to be more selective about which tapes got processed, as we used to have better data regarding if/when the transmitters were on. For various reasons this isn't the case anymore, and I look at old (and possibly inaccurate) transmitter schedules to determine if a tape is worth splitting or not. Lately, we've been throwing tapes into the splitter queue that seem okay, but may be more full of transmitter junk than we thought. That might result in a lot of these "fast workunits" which are read in by clients, immediately recognized as noisy, and send back quickly.

We have about 60-70 of these "fresh" tapes, but plenty of old tapes that were barely analyzed by classic (and I mean the "old" classic back in 1999-2000, hence all the 1999 data being put in the queue). The big hope is to get some multibeam data sooner than later - it'll be more fun for our users to crunch on newer data than do significantly better reprocessing on old.

- Matt

---

-- BOINC/SETI@home network/web/science/development person
-- "Any idiot can have a good idea. What is hard is to do it." - Jeanne-Claude

So, all this data we're talking about in this thread, including the 2006 to be split, is from the old, one-unit receiver, or is some of it from the new Alfa 7-element receiver?

---