archive: Re: SETI LDEs & probe searching

Re: SETI LDEs & probe searching

David Ocame ( davidocame@worldnet.att.net )
Mon, 07 Sep 1998 10:05:39 -0400

Chris Boyce wrote:
>
> A natural explanation for LDEs was put forward by Anthony Lawton almost a
> quarter century ago ['Long Delayed Echoes: the Search for a Solution' by A.T
> Lawton and S.J. Newton, Spaceflight, vol. 6 no 5, pp 181-187, May 1974].
> This was written in response to Duncan Lunan's hypothesis that the 1920s
> LDEs could be pattern interpreted and that they indicated a station-keeping
> probe from Epsilon Bootes lay in either the L4 or L5 Lagrange points in the
> Moon's orbit around the Earth (published in his book 'Man and the Stars',
> 1973 - 'Interstellar Contact' in the USA). Such a probe had been suggested
> by Bracewell who also suggested a message may lie in the echoes themselves.
>
> Lawton's natural origins hypothesis was regarded as sufficiently impressive
> by the British Interplanetary Society for them to award the author
> Fellowship of the Society. Since that time it has been cited a number of
> times usually in the context of dismissing further investigation of the
> phenomenon.
>
> That notwithstanding, the L4 and L5 points actually were subsequently
> investigated but with negative results ['A search for natural or artificial
> objects located at the Earth-Moon libration point', Icarus, vol. 42, pp
> 442-7, 1980].
>
> Twenty years ago I wrote a book 'Extraterrestrial Encounter' (same title in
> USA) in which I presented a case for ET probe searching. This was based on
> the hypothesis that the replicator probe strategy outlined by Michael Arbib
> ['The Likelihood of the Evolution of Communicating Intelligences on Other
> Planets', in Interstellar Communication: Scientific Perspectives (C.
> Ponnamperuma and A. Cameron, Eds.), Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., (1974) pp.
> 59-78] This appeared so logical a strategy that I assumed, then and now,
> that any alien society with sufficient technical proficiency would probably
> adopt it if they intended exploring the cosmos.
>
> There is good reason to make further searches. The technological level of
> the probes need not be particularly advanced on our own whereas the average
> ET society will probably be hundreds of millions of years beyond ourselves
> with technologies possibly 'akin to magic', to paraphrase A.C. Clarke.
> Replicator probes need only be a few centuries beyond us in technological
> development even if they were released a billion years ago.
>
> They would also be autonomous, self-sufficient and self-aware systems closer
> to biological entities than any robot device we might imagine. They will
> also be highly intelligent.
>
> And they will be local. They'll have been in the Solar System for tens of
> millions of years at least. So where they are concerned we are the new kids
> on the block!
>
> There's much more material on my website on this theme in the article 'The
> Logical Contact' - website address below.
>
> Chris Boyce
> ET-Presence - http://www.et-presence.ndirect.co.uk
> HOGMANAYCON - http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~cb/conpage.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtyndall@juno.com <rtyndall@juno.com>
> To: seti@sni.net <seti@sni.net> argus@seti1.setileague.org
> <argus@seti1.setileague.org>
> Cc: richard@burke-ward.demon.co.uk <richard@burke-ward.demon.co.uk>
> Date: 07 September 1998 05:49
> Subject: Re: SETI Yet another hair-brained-antenna-idea?
>
> >
> >On Sun, 6 Sep 98 20:04:36 +0100 Richard Burke-Ward
> ><richard@burke-ward.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> <...snip...>
> >
> >Anyways Richard, there are a lot of open minded folks on these lists..
> >Maybe some folks think LDEs are like UFOs and want to
> >hold back their comments until they see others come clean..
> >(Of course no one wants people to think they are UFO kooks)..
> >
> >In plain english, if ETI probes really exist (in this area), then
> >there is a very good likelihood of a link to many UFO sightings.(IMHO)..
> >
> >
> >Right now, it seems unlikely there is a link between probes and LDEs..
> >We can only speculate. One thing I have found, is you can't
> >easily convince very many people that things that they personally
> >have never seen really exist.. Most folks are like me and have
> >that old ' Seeing is believing' MO..
> >
> >Due to a few strange events in my own life, It's no leap of 'faith'
> >for me to know that these things exists. One has to believe in
> >his own powers of observation. (most especially if there were
> >1500 other people there too). But without more data, I'll have to
> >reserve judgement on what these things are.
> >
> >Don't be disheartened by the low response level.. I read your LDE
> >stuff and it got me thinking about an approach to the problem
> >that may not be too hard to execute.
> >
> >And don't think for one second that looking for probes is a
> >back-burner project. La grange point & asteroid scanning
> >have been done and will most likely be done repeatedly with
> >better & better technology. There are researchers that
> >think that probes are possibly here now or have been here in
> >the past.
> >
> >Oh no, it's late.. I'm off to the sleeping module.. 73 Rich <>
> >
> >
> >Richard Tyndall NJ1A Woburn, MA. USA
> >RTyndall@juno.com or nj1a@erols.com
> > ARGUS Observatory FN42jl
I can see I must have missed an entire thread here! I'll have to go back
and reread all of it that I can get.

David/n1yvv