103 lines
5.0 KiB
Plaintext
103 lines
5.0 KiB
Plaintext
The following is a reprint of an article which appeared in the
|
|
May/June issue of Technology Review. The article was written by
|
|
Stephen Strauss, a science reporter for the Toronto Globe and
|
|
Mail.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
What should astronomers do if they detect what might be a
|
|
message from intelligent beings from outer space? Who should
|
|
they tell first?
|
|
|
|
Priciples of scientific openness should guide all responses to
|
|
outer-space signals, according to an international group that
|
|
includes a space lawyer, astronomers, and the director of the
|
|
U.S. State Department's Office of Advanced Technology. After
|
|
four years of debate, the group formally presented an
|
|
international protocol for such occasions at an International
|
|
Astronomical Congress meeting in Bangalore, India, in October
|
|
1988.
|
|
|
|
"Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence" (SETI) projects assume
|
|
that coherent radio signals from outer space must be either
|
|
beacons from civilizations wishing to attract attention or
|
|
unplanned evidence of technical competence. But SETI astronomers
|
|
have long worried that some officials might see a potential for
|
|
political or technological gain in being the first to reply to
|
|
aliens. Such politicians might try to keep discoveries of
|
|
incomming signals secret. Messages would also need decoding, and
|
|
bringing in professional code breakers could enmesh the response
|
|
to extraterrestrials in the world of espionage.
|
|
|
|
Georgetown University law professor Allan Goodman has argued
|
|
since 1984 for international rules of conduct to keep SETI signal
|
|
analysis from becoming a political football. Peter Boyce,
|
|
executive director of the American Astronomical Society, adds,
|
|
"We want to circumvent political fiat" that would prevent a
|
|
discovery from reaching the global scientific community. Both
|
|
Boyce and Goodman are among the authors of the report.
|
|
|
|
Scientists have also been concerned that unverified alerts might
|
|
panic the public. News of a SETI event might lead to
|
|
embarrassment as well, because the signals could turn out to have
|
|
a less-than-glamorous origin.
|
|
|
|
In fact, since the first formal SETI searches began in 1960 at
|
|
the National Radio Astronomy Observatory at Greenbank, W. Va., a
|
|
number of "false positives" have been reported. These anomalies
|
|
have appeared so unique, that an alien civilization has seemed
|
|
the only explanation. Perhaps the most famous example is a
|
|
strong signal recorded in 1977 at Ohio State University. A team
|
|
member wrote "wow" next to his notes, lending that name to such
|
|
phenomena. The Ohio State wow never reappeared.
|
|
|
|
Boyce appends a related problem. "We need a breathing spell to
|
|
avoid being duped by Caltech undergraduates," he says. Those
|
|
students have made a name for thenselves by perpatrating hoaxes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY AND TRUST
|
|
|
|
The proposal addresses verification issues first. Those who
|
|
discover a signal would strive to eliminate the possibility that
|
|
a natural or human source had emitted it. If they succeeded,
|
|
they would notify national authorities such as NASA that
|
|
something significant had been found. They would also inform
|
|
research organizations that sign the treaty, who would attempt to
|
|
independently confirm the finding, or provide an alternate
|
|
explanation.
|
|
|
|
If the scientists at these organizations agree that some
|
|
extraterrestrial intelligence is the likely source of the signal,
|
|
they would notify the astronomical community at large, the
|
|
United Nations, and space-law bodies, such as the International
|
|
Union of Space Law in Paris. Only after this would the
|
|
discoverers go public with their finding, assuming that the
|
|
secret had not leaked out already.
|
|
|
|
While secrecy is necessary during the verification process, the
|
|
protocol places a high priority on ensuring open access to SETI
|
|
information. The protocol would bind signatories to record and
|
|
permanently store all data relating to a signal. Moreover,
|
|
researchers would make data generally available in a variety of
|
|
formats.
|
|
|
|
Because replying is a political act, the protocol adds that no
|
|
single nation should control the answer. It states that "no
|
|
response to a signal or other evidence of extraterrestrial
|
|
intelligence will be sent until appropriate international
|
|
consultations have taken place." Specifically, the accord looks
|
|
to a proposal presented at a 1987 meeting of the congress of the
|
|
International Astronomical Federation, which suggests making all
|
|
responses on behalf of humanity as a whole. And any
|
|
communication to outer space must be peaceful, truthful, and
|
|
express tolerance of differences.
|
|
|
|
Over the next four years, a number of scientific and space-law
|
|
bodies will consider the Bangalore proposal. The authors hope to
|
|
present it to the United Nations before Columbus Day 1992. On
|
|
that date, NASA hopes to begin a $90 million SETI program that
|
|
will sweep the skies looking for wow indicators from all
|
|
directions, as well as radio signals from the 1,000 closest
|
|
sun-type stars.
|
|
|