Moontanman Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 It's ALIENS! https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22630153-600-is-this-et-mystery-of-strange-radio-bursts-from-space/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 I would never suggest aliens or ET life doesn’t exist, but that seems to be a huge amount of energy to spend on a postcard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Interesting. Haven't come across these before. Whether it is new physics or aliens (or both!), the explanation will be worth knowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) From what I have read of these signals Moontanman they seem to be originating from several distances, the link below shows a spiral galaxy PKS B1740-517 picked up by the Australian ASKAP radio telescope at approximately one of these distances of 5BLY. If these same types of signal at different distances are of an engineered type, are they part of an inter-galactic communication channel? http://focusnews.com/tech-gadgets/five-billion-year-old-signal-emitted-by-galaxy-detected/74573/ Edited August 17, 2015 by Ant Sinclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACG52 Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Waiting 10 billion years for a reply puts a crimp in any communication system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) Waiting 10 billion years for a reply puts a crimp in any communication system. How do You know that some advanced race, using some unknown physics haven't achieved faster than light information exchange? Maybe with Quantum Entanglement as a candidate? Edited August 17, 2015 by Ant Sinclair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonDie Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) The article said "shorter-frequency". It appears to be a mix up of lower-frequency and shorter-wavelength, which have opposite meanings! lol Edited August 17, 2015 by MonDie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted August 17, 2015 Author Share Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) I thought it was interesting, I know better than to get excited but you never know. If these objects are indeed inside our galaxy their importance will go up for sure. As for FTL lets not get ahead of the game, speculations are fun but in this case it would appear serious science is involved, I wouldn't want to try and steal the thunder before we can be sure the lightning is real... If history is any measure of our success then we should have an open mind to new science and just because we are sure that man can't fly doesn't mean that supersonic jets aren't in our future... Edited August 17, 2015 by Moontanman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 How do You know that some advanced race, using some unknown physics haven't achieved faster than light information exchange? Why would some unknown faster than light communication method look just like normal light-speed radio waves? Maybe with Quantum Entanglement as a candidate? Because entanglement cannot be used for communication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACG52 Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 How do You know that some advanced race, using some unknown physics haven't achieved faster than light information exchange? How do I know that it isn't invisible pink unicorns talking to their relatives, the invisible blue unicorns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonDie Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) What is the frequency span anyway? Wikipedia says radio is three thousand to three hundred billion Hz. Forget it. I need a 2 week break from SFN. Edited August 17, 2015 by MonDie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Strange Mondie said; "The article said "shorter-frequency". It appears to be a mix up of lower-frequency and shorter-wavelength, which have opposite meanings!" So it's hardly a normal electro-magnetic wave is it? AC are You and Strange in some Police Academy type club because You both seem to mention pink-unicorns a lot ;-) Because entanglement cannot be used for communication. By Us YET! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Strange Mondie said; "The article said "shorter-frequency". It appears to be a mix up of lower-frequency and shorter-wavelength, which have opposite meanings!" So it's hardly a normal electro-magnetic wave is it? That is just a typo in the article. There is nothing to suggest it is not a normal burst of RF. AC are You and Strange in some Police Academy type club because You both seem to mention pink-unicorns a lot They are just a useful analogy to illustrate when people are talking nonsense. Because entanglement cannot be used for communication. By Us YET! There is absolutely no reason to think it can be. Ever. Your comment makes as much sense as saying: "Chocolate cannot be used for FTL communication ... YET!" It is downplayed by New Scientist (because it wouldn't fit their rather sensationalist agenda) but there are known terrestrial sources which have very similar properties: http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.5392 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Sinclair Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 There is absolutely no reason to think it can be. Ever. Your comment makes as much sense as saying: "Chocolate cannot be used for FTL communication ... YET!" I strongly disagree with Your statements here Strange, I believe using Quantum Entanglement for information exchange is a not as a complex problem as it is thought to be, and in fact the solution to using it in this way to be reletively simple! I'll try and find the time tomorrow to do a little drawing and explanation. -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 I strongly disagree with Your statements here Strange, I believe using Quantum Entanglement for information exchange is a not as a complex problem as it is thought to be, and in fact the solution to using it in this way to be reletively simple! I'll try and find the time tomorrow to do a little drawing and explanation. ! Moderator Note Do so in speculations; it's off-topic for this thread. Let's get back to discussing the OP 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xabi Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Its quite possible to find extraterrestral lives on earth like planet,they might be like us or might even be smarter and good looking. Or might be a multi_verse of us and are looking out for us the way we are looking out for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overtone Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 If it is aliens, they probably aren't 1) using this to communicate 2) living on a planet anywhere near the origin of what this appears to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robittybob1 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 I would never suggest aliens or ET life doesn’t exist, but that seems to be a huge amount of energy to spend on a postcard. But to send any sort of message across intergalactic distances it seems to be about the right strength. Scary to think there is the potential for that to be done though. How far away would the "ETs" need to be when the blasts occur? I would think they would at least need to be hidden behind a star IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astromark Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I'm sorry if this is a overlap of subjects but.. On revue of the information available we can not be sure at all that a intelagent signal was sent. and that asumptioons of who or even from where have not been satisfied. Until more information changes what we have on this it must remain a unknown. Just as the star dimming story being concluded to be dyson sphere must be regarded suspiciously . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robittybob1 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I'm sorry if this is a overlap of subjects but.. On revue of the information available we can not be sure at all that a intelagent signal was sent. and that asumptioons of who or even from where have not been satisfied. Until more information changes what we have on this it must remain a unknown. Just as the star dimming story being concluded to be dyson sphere must be regarded suspiciously . Gidday Astromark. I struggled to think it really was an intelligent signal being sent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy In Stanton Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Waiting 10 billion years for a reply puts a crimp in any communication system. But the alien comm techs are all unionized, so there is doubletime. Why would some unknown faster than light communication method look just like normal light-speed radio waves? Because entanglement cannot be used for communication. I don't "get" the articles I've read on that that say this. What am I missing? 1) You have 52 entangled particles, entangled 2 x 2. 2) They are arranged in 2 rows, each 26 particles long. 3) You keep one row here and put one row on a rocket and fly it one lightyear away. 4) Each particle of each row is in it's own little box 5) Now you have previously established that each particle pair represents a letter of the alphabet. 6) You want to send the name "CAT" 7) You open Box 3 (for C) and collapse the wave function. 8) The wave function of Box 3 on the starship collapses, creating an external measureable event (say, kills the 3rd of 26 cats). 9) The receiving comm tech records "C" as the first letter of the place-coded message. 10) Start with next letter Rinse and repeat. You don't have to know what the other wave function was; you don't even have to know what happened to your cat; all you have to know is which box created an external measureable event, in what order of time. What am I missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 What am I missing? Step 8 doesn't happen. Nothing changes on the starship. You could send them a smug message (at light speed) telling them what value they will measure for the particle in box 3 (if they measure it). But there is no way they can tell by measuring it that you have or have not doe so. All we have is a correlation between the results they measure and the results you measure. But you can only compare those measurements (and see that the correlation exists) at light speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy In Stanton Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) Step 8 doesn't happen. Nothing changes on the starship. You could send them a smug message (at light speed) telling them what value they will measure for the particle in box 3 (if they measure it). But there is no way they can tell by measuring it that you have or have not doe so. All we have is a correlation between the results they measure and the results you measure. But you can only compare those measurements (and see that the correlation exists) at light speed. I'm just not getting it. Is it not true that the entire Shrodinger's Cat thought experiment is based on a collapsing wave form setting off (or NOT setting off) a poison gas? Are there not, therefore, known mechanisms to "translate" the collapsing wave form to some event in the "macro" world? In other words, WHY does nothing happen in step 8? 1) the particles are entangled 2) you collapse the function of the "C" particle on earth 3) therefore the function of the "C" particle on the ship also must collapse 4) and as I said, you don't CARE which way the wave form on the ship collapses - merely that it does collapse (on the "C" particle as opposed to any of the other entangled particles). You encode the communication by selecting which "ordered" pairs of particles to collapse. Meaning is communicated by the position of the particles in the set of ordered particle pairs, not by what the ordered pair does. You don't care what the ordered pair does - merely that it does something. And you do not need to compare the measurements of the particle on Earth and the particle on the ship. The people on the ship merely look to see which particle changed. How it changed is irrelevant. They don't need to measure the particle on the ship. Since it is entangled with the collapsed particle on Earth, the particle on the ship will collapse whether anyone "looks" at it or not, right. That wave form collapse on the ship simply needs to "fire" a Shrodinger Cat event (of whatever result). The result is irrlevant too. What is important is merely that a result was triggered for THAT particular ("C-spot") particle. Again, please, what is wrong with the above logic? Edited December 5, 2015 by Old Guy In Stanton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 I'm just not getting it. Is it not true that the entire Shrodinger's Cat thought experiment is based on a collapsing wave form setting off (or NOT setting off) a poison gas? Not quite. The point of the thought experiment is to show that until you collapse the wavefunction (by opening the box) not only do you not know whether the cat is alive or dead, but in fact the cat is neither alive or dead. Note that "collapsing the wavefunction" is just one of many interpretations/descriptions of what happens (the Copenhagen interpretation). I think Schoedinger came up with this example to show how silly the Copenhagen interpretation is. Are there not, therefore, known mechanisms to "translate" the collapsing wave form to some event in the "macro" world? It is us doing something (making a measurement) that causes the wavefunction to collapse. So the event causes the collapse not the other way round. 2) you collapse the function of the "C" particle on earth 3) therefore the function of the "C" particle on the ship also must collapse Because they are entangled, there is only one wavefunctions. The people on the ship merely look to see which particle changed. How it changed is irrelevant. This is the key part. Before the people on Earth look, the pair of particles are in an indeterminate state. So the people on a ship cannot detect a change: all they can do is look at the particle and find it is not in an indeterminate state. But that is the same whether they do it first (and they collapse the wave function) or they do it second (and the wavefunction is already collapsed). In both cases it goes from "unknown" to 1 (or -1). To detect a change, they would have to look at it once and then look again later. But when they look the first time, the wavefunction collapses and the particles are no longer entangled. They don't need to measure the particle on the ship. Since it is entangled with the collapsed particle on Earth, the particle on the ship will collapse whether anyone "looks" at it or not, right. That wave form collapse on the ship simply needs to "fire" a Shrodinger Cat event (of whatever result). The only way for the particle to trigger something would be to have a detector that says, say, "if the particle is spin up then turn on the green light, if it spin down then turn on the red light". Before testing the particle, neither light is on and the particle is in an undetermined superposition of states. After testing, either the green light is on or the red light is on. But you still don't know if that is because the people on Earth have already looked at the particle (so they already know if you will get red or green) or because you are doing your test first (in which case no one knows). I don't know if that helps ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGeckomancer Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 (edited) So we know how sensationalized articles get. I am NOT SAYING that this is not aliens (I hope so to) but here is an interesting counter point. https://briankoberlein.com/2015/04/02/messages-from-home/ also http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2015/04/02/mathematical-pattern-found-in-enigmatic-radio-bursts-but-its-not-e-t/ Edited December 6, 2015 by TheGeckomancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts