Where can we actually see active working seti cpu's stats?

Here?

I disagree about the definition of 'host'. The box I'm working on has 2 CPUs with 8 cores between them, but it's only one host (number 2901600, as it happens).

that still shows my mentioned inaccurate counts I mean real cpu counts...?

---

Mandtugai!

I don't think people would like us sending them workunits that are a terabyte in size.

I wouldn't mind, I have over 2.4TB of storage space available on my main PC... if it would find ET - Send me the WU.

---

Aaron

One of things that was mentioned with Eric was that if the PC had room it would start doing the sort for Near Time Persistency... So size is not the larger issue but programming the application.. The added information gets stored in the database... But that is the "Plans" and Future...

If we were to look at a Future Application that could download only processed results and compare "adjacent" results... Then Your PC could shift through the millions of results in a short period of time... Or as you finish workunit it is being done in the background...

At this point, it is seeing the added sensitivity of the MultiBeam get to Seti Main.. That is still in Seti Beta, with technical problems...

This does not mention advances in the Seti Appliacation to handle the added increase of work... Or Servers to handle the increased Stress...

So in spite of what I do, I have less than a terrabyte of storage on a single machine... If things work right, then it would not be required.

All this is only if we help Seti Survive...

Regards

Pappa

I don't think people would like us sending them workunits that are a terabyte in size.

I wouldn't mind, I have over 2.4TB of storage space available on my main PC... if it would find ET - Send me the WU.

---

Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project.

.....I'll finish up by stating that the actual science, while moving at glacial speeds, is not going stale. Remember these signals are potentially coming from light years away - so a few years' delay isn't going to hurt the science. It will hurt user interest, though, which is always a concern and a source of frustration for us - that's a topic for a later time.

- Matt

I believe what you've said here. Thanks for taking the time to address these concerns. I think this statement you made is very reassuring:

".....Only relatively recently do we have our science database on a server up to the task of doing something other than inserting more signals. As mentioned above we need to do a big "database correction" - I'm sure more will be written up about this in due time. Then we need to develop the candidate hunter, a.k.a "persistency checker" which runs in real time. This latter project recently got an advance kick in the butt thanks to a new part-time programmer (Daniel) working on skymaps for our website....."

---

Now tell me you guys and girls at seti, you scientists and technicians... if you had the chance to get your hands on a cluster, even for short bursts... would you do it.?

I don't work at SETI, but I don't think it'd be that useful.

Why? Because it takes work.

To do some sort of stand-alone, non-BOINC project they have to code an application and test it on the cluster.

To do a BOINC project, they have to code the application and put it up on the SETI project (or other project) and start splitting work.

... and I don't think the two tasks (BOINC vs. Non-BOINC) are that different when they already have the servers "up and running."

If they're trying to grab a cluster that's available for a specific week sometime, and they miss it, then all the non-BOINC programming is wasted, unless they can find another cluster available some other week.

-- Ned

---

very nice explaination. I had seti@home 3 or 4 years ago if memory serves correctly and had a computer meltdown, it was a few years before I replaced it and so I created a new SETI@home account when I got the new computer. So don't let my numbers fool you, I have been a fan of SETI for years and I am more than happy to donate computer time to SETI@home, because I do not believe we are alone in the universe.

I don't remember where I heard the quote but it has been some years ago now it seems but I once heard said, (kinda paraphrased)with all the billions of stars out there, if only one in a million of them had a planet that had favorable conditions for intelligent life and said plantet had a 1 in a million chance that intelligent life had in fact formed there... I don't see how there is the slimmest chance that somewhere out there there isn't at least one other intelligent lifeform in the universe. Otherwise, it seems like an awful waste of space. So I, along with everyone else here, will do my part to add my computer time, to increase our likelihood, however slim it might be at perhaps finding said life. SETI@home is the perfect avenue for that

---

That sounds a lot like Jodie Foster's last line in "Contact" A GREAT movie based on Carl Sagan's book of the same name. Check out my sig line. It should be an exact quote from the movie.

Sorry for changing the subject, by the way

---

The universe is a pretty big place. It's bigger than anything anyone has ever dreamed of before. So if it's just us... seems like an awful waste of space. Right?

I'd like to know where I can find info regarding what calculations are being done and the theory behind. And I'd like to see a regular report on results, not our daily crunching race, but about potential spots and further investigations.

---

I'd like to know where I can find info regarding what calculations are being done and the theory behind. And I'd like to see a regular report on results, not our daily crunching race, but about potential spots and further investigations.

First, try the links on the About SAH page.

There's a plan to eventually do some near real time candidate identification. If enough donations are received so the project personnel can get out of emergency mode they'll be able to put some time toward developing that.

                                                                  Joe

... so the project personnel can get out of emergency mode...

Is that above/below worse/better than "Panic Mode"?

How many levels before they get down to more mundane levels such as "run mode" or "development mode"? (Or even "Friday Noght Beers mode"??)


Happy crunchin',
Martin

---

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

"How many levels before they get down to more mundane levels such as "run mode" or "development mode"? (Or even "Friday Noght Beers mode"??)"

With all the techies that I'm sure are part of this effort, it seems like there is probably enough brain power to help SETI develop a solution that either runs indepedent of the boinc architecture or within the architecture to anlayze the data. Rather than waiting for resources, I'm sure that an "open source" solution would probably be possible. With a little oversight, a little knowledge dispersion and coordination of tasks, I'm pretty sure we could help out.

- "the only power we won't run out of is brain power..." Disney exhibit on power.

---

Tim

Welcome to Seti again...

What many do not realize is how much is in the "works" without asking the question, do you want fries with that (they keep asking)? I hope that you do not take offense... I am having a Negative Day... Some things were stated and then moved into oblivion...

One of the things was was mentioned and lost in many comunications was that the Seti App that is running on your machine would be doing a bit of the science to see if the signal from the result previous was carried through to the current results or the one after that... Then the Server would just log the results... It would then be more "automatic." That is part of the goal of the Near Time persistency checker... However that is not at Seti Beta yet... Waht is in Seti Beta is MultiBeam (with issues) and Astropulse with some of the first issues... Then there is something about funding for all this...

So to answer the question, the Science is in the Database catching up will take a bit of computer horsepower which many users have been helping with... As Matt stated (Tech News Forum) they are moving machines around and getting the best they have in place for the next step...

So without dragging out Donations again... We just have to be patient...

"How many levels before they get down to more mundane levels such as "run mode" or "development mode"? (Or even "Friday Noght Beers mode"??)"

With all the techies that I'm sure are part of this effort, it seems like there is probably enough brain power to help SETI develop a solution that either runs indepedent of the boinc architecture or within the architecture to anlayze the data. Rather than waiting for resources, I'm sure that an "open source" solution would probably be possible. With a little oversight, a little knowledge dispersion and coordination of tasks, I'm pretty sure we could help out.

- "the only power we won't run out of is brain power..." Disney exhibit on power.

---

Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project.

With all the techies that I'm sure are part of this effort, it seems like there is probably enough brain power to help SETI develop a solution that either runs indepedent of the boinc architecture or within the architecture to anlayze the data. Rather than waiting for resources, I'm sure that an "open source" solution would probably be possible. With a little oversight, a little knowledge dispersion and coordination of tasks, I'm pretty sure we could help out.

The SETI science application is open-source, and a fair sized group of people is busy using that to make faster SETI science applications.

BOINC, both client and server, is open source, and there are volunteers actively helping with the development.

The BOINC server uses Apache, MySQL and the various servers at Berkeley are running either Solarus or Linux.

So, your point about open source was?

---

Hi Matt,

I drop by every now and then to read what has been happening and always wonder what ever happened to the plans to extend SETI@Home to the southern hemisphere, specifically, utilising data from the Parkes Telescope in Australia. I understand they have a multibeam receiver and do some basic signal checking on site, but what about the deeper analysis that can be done via this project? Is Parkes sensitive enough to utilise the data from it? I know during the classic days there was a plan to utilise the data, whatever happened?

Best regards,

---

Paul
(S@H1 8888)
And proud of it!

The Parkes Telescope is only 64 meters in diameter. If I remember correctly Dr Eric Korpela said that the Alfa receiver utilizes more than half the area of the Arecibo dish. So using Parkes would be quite a step down, perhaps by a factor of 12 to 15. The area of the entire Arecibo dish is 22.7 times that of Parkes. Yes, Parkes is parabolic, but that would probably not help nearly that much.

---

The Parkes Telescope is only 64 meters in diameter. If I remember correctly Dr Eric Korpela said that the Alfa receiver utilizes more than half the area of the Arecibo dish. So using Parkes would be quite a step down, perhaps by a factor of 12 to 15. The area of the entire Arecibo dish is 22.7 times that of Parkes. Yes, Parkes is parabolic, but that would probably not help nearly that much.

Parkes has one advantage over Arecibo: it points farther south.

---

@Matt Lebofsky:
We need an another radio telescope, don't we? How about Allen Telescope Array?

---

Manned mission to Mars in 2019 Petition <-- Sign this, please.

@Matt Lebofsky:
We need an another radio telescope, don't we? How about Allen Telescope Array?

I'll second that proposal!

I believe Berkeley is involved with the Allen Telescope Array via the Radio Astronomy Laboratory, so it shouldn't be a problem(?).

I'm assuming that the Berkeley Astronomy Dept. (BAD) is linked to the Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory (SSL)

I notice in the BAD link above that Dan Werthimer held a talk on SETI@Home related matters recently; does anybody know how it went?

---

Join TeamACC

Sometimes I think we are alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we are not. In either case the idea is quite staggering.

@Matt Lebofsky:
We need an another radio telescope, don't we? How about Allen Telescope Array?

I think the main reason for looking for another telescope is the field of view for Aricebo. IIRC (and maybe someone can find a reference) it can see fairly far to the north, but it can't see the southern hemisphere at all.

---

@Matt Lebofsky:
We need an another radio telescope, don't we? How about Allen Telescope Array?

I think the main reason for looking for another telescope is the field of view for Aricebo. IIRC (and maybe someone can find a reference) it can see fairly far to the north, but it can't see the southern hemisphere at all.

The Classic sky coverage map is a reasonable reference. Note that there are a few tracks extending 1 or 2 degrees into the southern hemisphere.

                                                                  Joe