Yes, I posted that when I realized I wasn't getting anywhere and you didn't seem interested in discussing anything. Forgive my sense of humor. I'm still not getting anywhere it seems...

Numerous actual radio astronomers have indicated that the Arecibo radio telescope could have a conversation with a similar device over about 50KLy, about halfway across the galaxy, through their respective atmospheres.

If you still adhere to your initial determination that the chance of this is zero, and exactly zero, that such transmissions could be received, please cite references of this. No off-the-cuff complaints about signal-to-noise problems or anything else. Please cite something that shows that this is impossible and that you were correct in that the chance is exactly zero as you initially indicated... and that all those radio astronomers, astrophysicists, exobiologists et al are wrong.

Again, your own direct quote from your own previous posting: "The odds of picking up any signals with a receiver at the bottom of our atmosphere were always zero."

---

What we're doing is providing free resources and a grant application justification to

science departments and their students.
...

EXACTLY

Love to see an Accounting of Almost 20 Years of Salaries Going to dA Hard Working of SETI.

They Rake in more now, since Outages have Gone From 4 to 12-14 Hours.

Wish My 3 Digit IQ allowed Me to 'Gravy Train' a Bunch of 'Free' Dollas.

White Supremacist Yappin'

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

this was NEVER about 'finding ET' my friend.. The odds of picking up any signals with a receiver at the bottom of our atmosphere were always zero. Look into an analysis of signal strengths and distance attenuation if you really want to know.

Since you believe that why have you been wasting resources on this project for all these years?

you need to learn to read more carefully. or stop being sullen...
That was a child's response. Unworthy of a science site.

Whether or not my question was childish or not, will you answer the question?

---

3 Digit IQ => 100

---

this was NEVER about 'finding ET' my friend.. The odds of picking up any signals with a receiver at the bottom of our atmosphere were always zero. Look into an analysis of signal strengths and distance attenuation if you really want to know.

Since you believe that why have you been wasting resources on this project for all these years?

you need to learn to read more carefully. or stop being sullen...
That was a child's response. Unworthy of a science site.

Whether or not my question was childish or not, will you answer the question?

I answered that question in my posts. come on. you can find it can't you?

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

I looked in about 5 hrs ago, saw there was nothing much I could say.
But now I have to comment,

You're still here. Why?

---

[quote]Yes, I posted that when I realized I wasn't getting anywhere and you didn't seem interested in discussing anything. Forgive my sense of humor. I'm still not getting anywhere it seems... {quote}

yeah. you abandoned talk and went to taunt. you're done. no excuses...no back pedaling, no saving face.

{quote}Numerous actual radio astronomers have indicated that the Arecibo radio telescope could have a conversation with a similar device over about 50KLy, about halfway across the galaxy, through their respective atmospheres. {quote}

and I have read others that claim beyond a couple dozen LY it's fruitless. and nobody knows for sure what's correct which is why there are multiple opinions.

You've proven your inability to actually discuss when you get some articulate opposition..sorry...

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

I looked in about 5 hrs ago, saw there was nothing much I could say.
But now I have to comment,

You're still here. Why?

I got involved counting up how many people would approach me in an immature, yes childish way. You'd be #5 with your ''don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out''

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

and I have read others that claim beyond a couple dozen LY it's fruitless. and nobody knows for sure what's correct which is why there are multiple opinions.

You've proven your inability to actually discuss when you get some articulate opposition..sorry...

I just did... and you are dodging the question with excuses.

I would like you to please cite some of these "multiple opinions" from peer-reviewed sources, or even just reliable experts in radio astronomy.

Again:

Numerous actual radio astronomers have indicated that the Arecibo radio telescope could have a conversation with a similar device over about 50KLy, about halfway across the galaxy, through their respective atmospheres.

If you still adhere to your initial determination that the chance of this is zero, and exactly zero, that such transmissions could be received, please cite references of this. No off-the-cuff complaints about signal-to-noise problems or anything else. Please cite something that shows that this is impossible and that you were correct in that the chance is exactly zero as you initially indicated... and that all those radio astronomers, astrophysicists, exobiologists et al are wrong.

Your own direct quote from your own previous posting: "The odds of picking up any signals with a receiver at the bottom of our atmosphere were always zero."

---

yeah. you abandoned talk and went to taunt. you're done. no excuses...no back pedaling, no saving face.

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

this was NEVER about 'finding ET' my friend.. The odds of picking up any signals with a receiver at the bottom of our atmosphere were always zero. Look into an analysis of signal strengths and distance attenuation if you really want to know.

Since you believe that why have you been wasting resources on this project for all these years?

you need to learn to read more carefully. or stop being sullen...
That was a child's response. Unworthy of a science site.

Whether or not my question was childish or not, will you answer the question?

I answered that question in my posts. come on. you can find it can't you?

If this is your answer I applaud your altruism. Your need to bash Berkley, S@H and Eric baffles me. Oh well it is your karma and you are starting to sound like Clyde and that's not a good thing.

---

k. bye.

Why are you still here?

Or are you afraid of being hit in the backside by the door as you leave?

Cheers.

0.01 is also a three digit number.

I looked in about 5 hrs ago, saw there was nothing much I could say.
But now I have to comment,

You're still here. Why?

I got involved counting up how many people would approach me in an immature, yes childish way. You'd be #5 with your ''don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out''

nice finesse…

---

...

Funny thing about this project...

... we have seen many instances of flare ups which has led to public outbursts of "I'm gone or I'm going".

Their still here both crunching & posting.

Makes me wonder which addiction is worse...

... Smack or Seti :-)

I really think it is important to protect free speech. But should the police protect my ability to skate a ramp as an expression of my art by blocking the sidewalk? What is the limit of state responsiblity to deal with the natural consequences of commercial activity? Your are guilty of assault if you get hit by someone provoked by your 'fighting words'. Seriously people understand Coulter is in the business of getting reactions ... such as this post / thread.

The result here is fantastic for Coulter. She could care less about speaking here.

Yes, I posted that when I realized I wasn't getting anywhere and you didn't seem interested in discussing anything. Forgive my sense of humor. I'm still not getting anywhere it seems...

yeah. you abandoned talk and went to taunt. you're done. no excuses...no back pedaling, no saving face.

Numerous actual radio astronomers have indicated that the Arecibo radio telescope could have a conversation with a similar device over about 50KLy, about halfway across the galaxy, through their respective atmospheres.

and I have read others that claim beyond a couple dozen LY it's fruitless. and nobody knows for sure what's correct which is why there are multiple opinions.

You've proven your inability to actually discuss when you get some articulate opposition..sorry...

<note: edited tags above to correct errors>

Howdy, Peeper.

You might have slightly overstated (initially) the extreme unlikely-hood of any detection of an ETI by the S@H project, but not by much. It really depends on exactly what type of signal we hope to find.

Years ago (15 or so) I researched the specs of the equipment S@H used and ran some numbers. If we hope to find the radio 'leakage' from another civilization, similar to our own 'broadcasts', good fsckin luck. We could spot our own leakage maybe out to a distance somewhere between the orbit of Neptune (30 AU) and the outer edge of the Kuiper belt (1000 AU). By the time you get to the outer edge of the Oort cloud (about 100,000 AU), it is a definite NO. 1 Light-year is about 63,240 AU. The distance to the nearest star (Proxima Centauri) is about 4.243 Light-years or 268,332 AU. So, we couldn't even detect ourselves at a distance less than halfway to the nearest star.

Another option for the Signal would be a (very) high-powered omnidirectional beacon.

A third option would be again a (very) high-powered beacon broadcast using an antenna that gives a tight beam pattern. This would give the longest range.

But, the ETI would have to maintain the beam pointed at us for long enough for us to notice it... Essentially, they would have to already KNOW we were here and actively WANT us to know that THEY were there. The range at which the beacon would be effective would depend on the power level ETI is able to put into the beacon (on a long term basis). This might get out to somewhere between your 'couple dozen LY' and maybe about 1000 LY.

Those that dismiss 'signal to noise ratio' just don't understand the problem. If the signal is too far down in the mud (the noise), we won't be able to find it. Atmospheres are noisy. Space is noisy. Radio receiver circuits are NOISY.

Sorry, folks, but the S@H project almost certainly will NOT find 'ETI'.

Then, WHY S@H? Lots of reasons.

ETI was a 'hook' to get people to participate.

1. S@H has helped with a variety of research on various Radio Astronomy topics such as this one:
https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_sci_newsletters.php?frag=news-10.inc

2. S@H was also one of the original proof-of-concept for large public DC computing projects.

3. S@H was also the flagship project in the development of BOINC.

1, 2, and 3 are ALL worthwhile goals. 'Finding ETI'? IMO, not gonna happen.

Now as to your original subject... UC Berkeley's treatment of certain people.

Sorry, but universities are supposed to stand for free exchange of ideas.

It is highly ironic that UC Berkeley (the birthplace of the modern Free-Speech movement) is actively censoring Free-Speech.

Sorry, but Freedom of Speech is meaningless without the Freedom to Offend.

Free-speech 'zones' are wrong.

Cancelling scheduled appearances because some people might get offended is wrong. (EVERYTHING is going to offend SOMEONE).

UC Berkeley (and many, many other universities) is/are doing every student a disservice by restricting the range of speech and ideas that they are exposed to.

For instance, I was raised to be STRONGLY anti-communist. However, I welcomed the opportunity to intellectually engage with communists. It helped me learn about the subject from other perspectives, and to develop my critical thinking skills and to develop my skills at rhetoric. I had a history class I took. History of Modern Europe (1450-1950) (2 semesters).. The 2nd semester was almost exclusively about the Writings of Marx (a couple of weeks about WWI, though). The Professor was a communist (self-admitted, 1st day of class). I had to read and write papers on virtually ALL of Marx's writings. I made A's on them, even though I opposed Marx.

College kids today are not, I think, going to be given the same chance to make a scholarly approach to subjects they (and their Professors) disagree with. Limiting exposure to certain subjects is doing kids a disservice.

I consider studying certain topics and learning to successfully argue a side unpopular with the Professor(not to mention many others at the University) to have been a VITAL part of my Education. We need to give kids today the SAME opportunity.

Be well, Peeper.

KWSN - MajorKong.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

It is you who is doing the taunting, avoiding answeing questions and generally seeking to distrupt.
If you are serious in your earlier comment about wanting to assist universities in raising money by one way or another I would suggest that you remove yourself completely from SETI@Home, a project you believe to be certain to fail, and relocate to one of the many medical projects that use the BOINC framework.

---

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

All other politics aside, the failure of the university administration to protect the constitutional rights of students of ALL viewpoints makes it an organization I can no longer support, even in the most tangential way.

So then don't.

If other students and faculty have to be hurt and suffer because of their employers stand, so be it. I will not be held hostage to culturally destructive behavior.

So you're saying it is OK to hurt students and faculty? Do you mean physically or financially or emotionally, or a combination? If any of those combinations include support for physical harm, then I will strongly oppose you.

I'm sorry...it may not be your 'fault' but you take their paycheck or pay them tuition and it is, in part, your responsibility.

And what, precisely, do you think SETI could do to help? Pressure the administration? Up and leave Berkeley? Close down in protest of Berkeley's decisions?

Besides, I've well known for over a decade that your 2000 or so top contributors..those with access to steal time on big systems and/or have a garage full of salvage machines are doing all the work and i'm contributing nothing but second third and fourth re runs of the same data anyway.

[citation needed]

Though I suspect, in the end, you'll find the 'social justice' types don't have the attention span/staying power to keep this program going.

It seems this and many of your posts are an invitation to antagonize those that disagree and/or choose to stay. At your current RAC, you'll still be allowed to post for several months. Do you intend on flaming everyone that disagrees with you as you've done so far?