Thanks :)

The surest sign that there is intelligent life out there is that they HAVEN'T contacted us...…..


LOL

---

this project Seti At Home i have been number crunching for a long time and gutted there's no more data to search through and carnt Waite until this resumes

---

Thanks for the ride, it was a good one!

---

Hi, I've been with the program since the civil insertion to it. i started in 1999 under the classic SETI. I programmed all my computers here in USA and abroad to help with the search. I was a supported from the beginning but I was dropped while I recovered from a paralyzing accident. When I came back noticed ALL my data had disappeared and I had to start ALL OVER AGAIN. Ever since I continue with my support and searching. Not to long ago, since June 2020 I got disconnected by you and I didn't finished reporting the tasks i was assigned to. Its been more than 20 years of faithful dedication to SETI Program and The Planetary Society and I feel dishearten by the news im receiving. All this time you were aware of false information and you didn't communicated to us. There are being visits by Its to this planet and you didn't notice them? Please I need a clarification of ALL THESE... as a Teacher and Astronomer I would like to continue helping but please honor my request.

Sincerely yours,

Gloria T. Berg (nee. Bayona)

---

Dear Tori, very sorry to read about your accident and the problems with the loss of your computer SETI records. There were various problems over the years that I noticed the SETI tech people dealing with: for example, disk drives going bad on servers. It may be that they were unable to recover all data from a bad disk. Or, maybe someone made a mistake. As I'm sure you realize, students were coming onto the project and leaving from time to time. My guess is that the SETI batches that your computers processed were not lost. Your login name and related info may just have been lost. My understanding is that all of the SETI data that was processed by people like you and me over the years is now being subjected to various statistical and other mathematical analyses to validate the processing and possibly find signals that were missed. E.T. may have been talking to us and we didn't realize it. The SETI software changed and improved over the years, which must be complicating their current analyses. I'm just a humble worker bee, like you, but I also am sad over the suspension of the SETI Project. I will be very interested in the results of the "post process analysis" that they are doing. A report is supposed to be published. (I don't know when.) Part of the problem may be financial.
I hope you are recovering from your accident, and that you have time to look at other BOINC projects. Keep the faith! SETI may start up again!
Be well and be happy! Best Regards, Rich

---

Thanks for a good answer for Tori.

... In 20 years the project found nothing, using data from Arecibo and Green Bank telescopes...

Hey! Not so fast there!


s@h has certainly found lots of received signals.

So far what hasn't been found are any easily recognized unambiguous signals of an ET.

The present analysis that is being worked on is taking the 20+ years of accumulated data to work through searching for anything that is seen to be 'non-natural' and so find candidates for further investigation. We don't know what an ET signal is, or what an ET signature might look like, so one search strategy is to eliminate everything we do know about to then list the remaining signals that are 'unexpected' and 'interesting'...

Meanwhile, along the way over the years, the s@h data has already been used to map the hydrogen distribution structure of our Milky Way galaxy in 3d, and to power multiple various other astronomy observations.

And we spawned Boinc upon the cybersphere!


Fantastic achievements already!

And all on frugal funding and fantastic personal dedication.


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

After 20+ years of providing my computer CPU time, you just go dark. No believable explanation as to why, Just “thanks we are going dark, have a good day”. I have removed the Bonic app from my computers. Never to rejoin anything come out of Berkeley.


Thanks and good-bye

---

After 20+ years of providing my computer CPU time, you just go dark. No believable explanation as to why, Just “thanks we are going dark, have a good day”.

If you chose not to read the very first post in this thread where they did explain why, that is hardly the fault of the project.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

There is an article by Adam Mann in Scientific American, of which I could read only a few lines in the Italian edition of Scientific American, Le Scienze, which says that we should not limit ourselves to radio waves in the search for ET but explore also gravitational waves, neutrinos and what else,
Tullio

---

It would be great to hear the scientific detail of why its not considered worthwhile to continue to process new data. After all if such transmissions were sent out you would hardly expect to see them over such s short period of time.

Does Seti now have sufficient in house processing capability due to technological improvements to simply not need this distributed computing approach?

or are the CO2 emission from generating the power to run this project simply not worth it?

Can the actual reasoning behind this decision please be explained as im sure may thousands of users would like a clear scientific explanation.

---

I would like to know also, I feel very badly let down by SETI, and I'm not the only one.

The answer is that they have so much data to sort through as the second phase of the search it has been considered expedient to stop generating more possible hits for the time being. With an ever increasing number of potential hits from our screening (billions of possibles) it was becoming obvious that something had to be done, three choices:
1 - Throw it all away;
2 - Stop generating new potential hits and do a massive correlation exercise on the existing mountain, then improve the screening algorithms to stop so many of the "obviously wrong" being detected;
3 - Continue generating potential hits and try to do the massive correlation task on the ever growing database, then try to improve the algorithms while using the old ones.

1 Is less than desirable for so many reasons that it landed on the cutting room floor early in the debate.
3 Doing the sort of correlation that is being talked about would mean that every time a new potential was found one would have to re-run a large part of the correlation again (and there were millions of potentials generated every week).
2 Is left as the least bad option - we don't have any work to do, but the project is able to work off a fixed database.

So far Nebula has only looked at a small corner of the total database, but the first look-see has thrown up some issues with the actual correlation algorithm that have to be ironed out before the mega runs can take place. Under the current correlation process this needs access to the whole database and a supercomputer so is, sadly, not really suited to distributed computing.

What we can look forward to (I hope) are the new screening algorithms that will allow us to re-start crunching in a similar manner to that we've been used to over the last ~20years.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

The answer is that they have so much data to sort through as the second phase of the search it has been considered expedient to stop generating more possible hits for the time being. With an ever increasing number of potential hits from our screening (billions of possibles) it was becoming obvious that something had to be done, three choices:
1 - Throw it all away;
2 - Stop generating new potential hits and do a massive correlation exercise on the existing mountain, then improve the screening algorithms to stop so many of the "obviously wrong" being detected;
3 - Continue generating potential hits and try to do the massive correlation task on the ever growing database, then try to improve the algorithms while using the old ones.

1 Is less than desirable for so many reasons that it landed on the cutting room floor early in the debate.
3 Doing the sort of correlation that is being talked about would mean that every time a new potential was found one would have to re-run a large part of the correlation again (and there were millions of potentials generated every week).
2 Is left as the least bad option - we don't have any work to do, but the project is able to work off a fixed database.

So far Nebula has only looked at a small corner of the total database, but the first look-see has thrown up some issues with the actual correlation algorithm that have to be ironed out before the mega runs can take place. Under the current correlation process this needs access to the whole database and a supercomputer so is, sadly, not really suited to distributed computing.

What we can look forward to (I hope) are the new screening algorithms that will allow us to re-start crunching in a similar manner to that we've been used to over the last ~20years.

Thanks for posting this. When SETI returns, my computers and I will be there to support it!
Stay safe,
John

---

What we can look forward to (I hope) are the new screening algorithms that will allow us to re-start crunching in a similar manner to that we've been used to over the last ~20years.

Take your time. I will be there, in a few months or a few years. Just bring back SETI to us...

You make good points.

3 - Continue generating potential hits and try to do the massive correlation task on the ever growing database, then try to improve the algorithms while using the old ones.

3 Doing the sort of correlation that is being talked about would mean that every time a new potential was found one would have to re-run a large part of the correlation again (and there were millions of potentials generated every week).

Another reason why option 3 wasn't doable, I suspect, was that the distributed part of the project was starting to crumble under its own weight. The servers needed more and more manual interventions to continue sending and accepting work. It must've taken ever more time away from developing Nebula and doing the actual science: they couldn't have continued for very long.

---

Gazing at the skies, hoping for contact... Unlikely, but it would be such a fantastic opportunity to learn.

My alternative profile

I joined Seti over all other projects because, even if just a tiny chance of success, success could prove more fruitful than all the other projects put together.

---

I agree with you.

---

Realistically, I could see this coming because without advances in communication; well radio has it's limits wrt prospects for ET engaging in interplanetary communication. Communication with the moon (Apollo mission) had time delay people would rather not have. That said with quantum enmeshed particles being used for some secure communications now; until there is other technology to be on the search for as a possible work around to the time/distance problem...

Big question, probably many are thinking is updates to the BOINC software given many projects are now using it? We have a working platform now, but if hibernation continues long term, some projects might find need for updates in the years ahead. Especially if computer advances require software updates to continue to function well. Processor updates from Intel/AMD or Windows updates from Microsoft could necessitate software updates to avoid potential issues. New version of Windows and one's utilities stop functioning without software company provided support/newer versions is a prime example....

---

Development of the BOINC platform should continue as normal, despite the suspension of SETI as a project. The processes are separate, although there is some overlap of personnel between the two.

BOINC announced a new recommended version (7.16.11) earlier this month: this is available for Apple, Linux, and Windows. Many of the changes were required to cope with major changes in the Apple platform, confirming the points you make about the necessity of responding to external pressures.