Complex Numbers

It's Out There

From aeon, an article on a subject I've discussed before:

    Alien life is no joke  
Not long ago the search for extraterrestrials was considered laughable nonsense. Today, it’s serious and scientific

Though I'm repeating myself here, I feel the need to note that "life" doesn't imply "technologically-capable life."

Suddenly, everyone is talking about aliens.

For those of us paying attention, people have been talking about it all my life, and even before.

The next big multibillion-dollar space telescope (the successor to the James Webb) will be tuned to search for signatures of alien life on alien planets and NASA has a robust, well-funded programme in astrobiology.

Good. I hope they find some. Not Klingons, of course. Even just evidence of microbes or their equivalent would be a Big Fucking Deal.

Meanwhile, from breathless newspaper articles about unexplained navy pilot sightings to United States congressional testimony with wild claims of government programmes hiding crashed saucers, UFOs and UAPs (unidentified anomalous phenomena) seem to be making their own journey from the fringes.

On that front, the science is far less secure.

For decades, scientists wanting to think seriously about life in the Universe faced what’s been called the ‘giggle factor’, which was directly related to UFOs and their culture.

I once tried to start a conspiracy theory that went like: We have been trained to mock UFO enthusiasts because the extraterrestrials among us wanted to ensure that anyone who called them out for what they were got scorn heaped upon them.

I suck at starting conspiracy theories.

But for me, as a researcher in the field of technosignatures (signs of advanced alien tech) – the new face of SETI – getting past the giggle factor poses an existential challenge.

Once again, there's an implied conflation between "life" and "technolife." I call it that to avoid the inevitable tired jokes about "intelligence." You humans can be considered "technolife," but there's nothing that we know of about evolution that requires its development. There's probably exolife in our near stellar vicinity (perhaps even in our solar system), but I'd be surprised if technolife was anything but rare.

It is, however, in our best interests to search for both. It's probably not in our best interests to keep beaming signals to Proxima Centauri with messages like "Visit scenic Earth!"

There follows a bit of history about seeing UFOs (more recently renamed to UAPs, likely in an attempt to avoid mockery). And also the history of people looking for alien life.

I have no doubt that people have seen weird shit in the sky. What I have an issue with is immediately jumping to the "must be aliens" conclusion. It's like seeing ghosts. Perhaps you did see something; that doesn't mean it's a dead person's disembodied spirit.

Remarkably, when it comes to exoplanets, we are now also able to see exactly which planets are in their star’s habitable zone, where liquid water (the key, we believe, for life) can exist. That means we know exactly where to look in our search for life (something Drake could only dream of).

The "habitable zone" thing is real, but again, some people seem to equate "habitable zone" with "definitely must harbor life." No, it's a probability thing. If you're looking for a bear, you look in the woods, not a desert. If you're looking for a fish, you look in the ocean, not a mountain. Yes, sometimes you get fish in mountain lakes or streams or whatever, but your best bet is ocean.

Also, keep in mind there's a real chance that Jupiter's moon Europa harbors (simple) life under its ice cover, and it's not in the Sun's "habitable zone."

We’ve also demonstrated that there is no reason to suppose that biosignatures will be more common than technosignatures.

Yeah, that sounds like wishful thinking to me.

Since the exact same techniques are required to search for both bio- and technosignatures, there’s every reason to carry out both kinds of search at the same time.

But please, keep looking.

But if my colleagues and I claimed we’d found life on another world, we’d be required to provide evidence that meets the highest scientific standards. While we should let future studies lead us where they may, there is simply no such evidence surrounding UFOs and UAPs that meets these standards today.

And that bit is really what I care about: evidence. Not this leap to conclusions that definitely wasn't instigated by the aliens hiding among us.

The next big space telescope NASA is planning will be called the Habitable Worlds Observatory.

I'm betting that's a working title and it'll end up being named after someone, like the others were. One hopes they choose someone not associated with bigotry, this time.

Just remember, when they find biosignatures, don't immediately leap to "little green men" or their pop-culture alien equivalent. We're trying to keep our existence a secret, dammit.