An honest question about SETI....not all distributed computing, just SETI@Home

herbiehancock

Senior member
May 11, 2006
789
0
0
I think distributed computing can have a far-reaching impact, esp. in some projects like global warming and the like.


But I have a question about SETI@Home.

I've read interviews with Dr. David P. Anderson, done pretty recently within the last year, and he himself says he no longer runs SETI but instead global warming DC projects.

Further, he said the SETI project was set up as a demonstration project with no expectation of it continuing or ever showing results. That's because it's now conceded there is little chance of detecting the "leaking" transmissions of another planet as those signals are too weak to stand out from the universe's background noise.

So, why is there still a push to get people to join? Every time I see the "Join us in SETI@Home" it's tied tightly to:

The TeAm is in 18th place, but 4 teams are a threat. Production has been falling over the past months as crunchers have moved to other projects. Some other teams are catching up!

So, is the real motivation for the distributed computing around here all about positions and points and being ahead of others? No other motivation at all?

I never read about "We're making progress on cancer." or "We've now cracked X # of genomes." or anything else.....only "We're in 8th position and can pass whoever for #5! Join Now!!!"

Wouldn't the time being spent on SETI be better served spending it on things like cancer or global warming?

Not against looking for intelligent life in space, it's just it seems such a waste of computing power with no prospect of success.....success that will have no implications for us here on earth, unlike global warming research which will affect each and every one of us on this planet.
 

Philippart

Golden Member
Jul 9, 2006
1,290
0
0
Rosetta has done some progress in the HIV vaccine research, they sent in some vaccine candidates and collaborated on this article!
 

Wolfsraider

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2002
8,305
0
76
Originally posted by: herbiehancock
I think distributed computing can have a far-reaching impact, esp. in some projects like global warming and the like.


But I have a question about SETI@Home.

I've read interviews with Dr. David P. Anderson, done pretty recently within the last year, and he himself says he no longer runs SETI but instead global warming DC projects.

Further, he said the SETI project was set up as a demonstration project with no expectation of it continuing or ever showing results. That's because it's now conceded there is little chance of detecting the "leaking" transmissions of another planet as those signals are too weak to stand out from the universe's background noise.

So, why is there still a push to get people to join? Every time I see the "Join us in SETI@Home" it's tied tightly to:

The TeAm is in 18th place, but 4 teams are a threat. Production has been falling over the past months as crunchers have moved to other projects. Some other teams are catching up!

So, is the real motivation for the distributed computing around here all about positions and points and being ahead of others? No other motivation at all?

I never read about "We're making progress on cancer." or "We've now cracked X # of genomes." or anything else.....only "We're in 8th position and can pass whoever for #5! Join Now!!!"

Wouldn't the time being spent on SETI be better served spending it on things like cancer or global warming?

Not against looking for intelligent life in space, it's just it seems such a waste of computing power with no prospect of success.....success that will have no implications for us here on earth, unlike global warming research which will affect each and every one of us on this planet.

Thats one of the great things about DC. We can all choose to run whichever program we want. Global warming for you cancer for another a cure for aids, What makes it difficult is the probability. There are thousands of wrong answers maybe millions of wrong answers for each right answer. There is no one great answer but rather a chance to make a difference. Why do people fish if they never catch anything, or wed just to see it end in divorce? Truth is its a gamble, like bingo or the lottery, but instead of fame and fortune we gamble on a cure that helps everyone or we speed up testing on an accelerator, or at the very least we rule out what doesnt work.

Its done on spare cpu cycles, costs pennies a day and we get to see the results of our labors (even wrong ones help).

When looking for a needle in a haystack, you search untill you find it, but when the answers remain unknown you search each piece for clues. By ruling out what doesnt work you may stumble upon what does, here though we only do the crunching, its up to the scientists and doctors etc to make sense of the data. It saves tham money on comptational costs and I get to see something being done even if its only ruling out what doesnt work.

I have always looked at dc as a jigsaw puzzle. Its going to one day form a picture, as each piece falls into place and it would thrill me to death to know that I and my teammates helped even in some miniscule way.

In answer to your question... What if we never figure out or cannot stop global warming but met someone that could (all speculation) would that change your mind about seti? Whsat if they /he/she/it had the cures for cancer and aids? what if we never looked?

Since this is all speculation, and since this may never be solved, why bother at all?

Me I tend to enjoy believing in the long shot, the what ifs and I enjoy hunting for that elusive work unit that may hold the answers, untill then who knows :)

Mike
 

BlackMountainCow

Diamond Member
May 28, 2003
5,759
0
0
Good question herbiehancock.

Fact is, a lot of us are indeed into DC more for the competition than for the real results. If good results occur, the better, but if not, it's the competition, the point, the score, the ranks.

But there are also those, and I'd say also a lot of us, who really care about the reults and science. For my part, I've never run a mathematical project, as I don't see the use of finding a freakin' large prime number other than the "fame". I also stopped SETI a long time ago. For me, it really is the real life benefit, like cures, new technology and such.

But there's another point. Every DC project also has its down sides. Take the global warming projects for example. Just by the mere crunching of ClimatePrediction.NET work units, you use your computer, you use electricity! Thus, you add to the problem of global warming! Take Folding@Home vs. Rosetta@Home vs. Proteins@Home vs. Predictor@Home. Yes, they all say the research different things, but still, if they combine their efforst, the better the results should be. But they're from different institutions and different money givers behind them.

In the end, it's just like that: If you're in for the stats and points, help the TeAm where it needs the most help. If you're in for the science, chose your project(s) and contribute as much as you want/can and don't bother with the creds & stats. If you can combine science AND stats in one project (or more): you hit bull's eye and DC in general is your thing.

:)
 

petrusbroder

Elite Member
Nov 28, 2004
13,347
1,153
126
I'll discuss DC first and get back to Seti@home later ...

I am in DC for the results in science. It is science that stimulates my sense of the phantastic.

But I would not have had som much fun in my endevours if the stats and the competion were not what they are.
Also I would have probably quit quite some time ago if the DC community was not so great, so warm and so fun to be with.'

There is also one more point: if there were no stats, no competions, no friendly rivalry, much less of the science would get done! If only 100 of 1 000 crunchers were doing DC just for the science (and for no other reason) then only 10% of the crunching would get done.

The scientists, admins and mods themselves promote the competions because they want as many crunchers as possible to take part in the crunching.

So: the reason for me to start and to do it is science. The fun part - which sometimes keeps in DC is the community, the stats and the competion.

So why Seti@home? For myself: I am sci-fi fan and want to contribute to that part. It is also a project which has - as I see it just now - very little practical value.

But: most of the stuff we take for granted just now started - in the very beginning - as projects where the contemporaries could not see the practical value. That came later.

This is the case when thinking of the composition of matter: I am quite sure that Rutherford, Planck, Curie and others (in the beginning of 1900) did not think of the practical effect of their research when they did it. It is well documented that quite a few of their contemporaries thought they were more or less crazy for doing this impractical research. Having solid state computers rests on the research these people did ...

I am running some down to earth practical projects (e.g. MalariaControl) where the results are directly applicable to reality. These results will help not in 10 years but in 3 - 5 years. I like that. I have run all the "protein" projects at some time and for quite some time. I am crunching DPAD, which is very practical for the design of a neutrino-factory for a particle accelerator. But I get the most satisfaction I want from seti and einstein ...

Well, I am also quite crazy ...
 

Assimilator1

Elite Member
Nov 4, 1999
24,149
516
126
Fair question herbiehancock considering what you've read.

Though I have to ask where did you read this?

Further, he said the SETI project was set up as a demonstration project with no expectation of it continuing or ever showing results. That's because it's now conceded there is little chance of detecting the "leaking" transmissions of another planet as those signals are too weak to stand out from the universe's background noise.

This is the 1st I've heard of that ,why would they be bothering to upscale the project if signals were nearly impossible to detect?:confused:

So, is the real motivation for the distributed computing around here all about positions and points and being ahead of others? No other motivation at all?

No it isn't just about points for most of us (IMO) , it's a bit of both ,with a minority at either ends of the points/science spectrum.
Personally speaking ,if I found out that the science was meaningless (if we found out that signals could never be detected this way) then I'd switch all machines away from SETI now.
Though this is not to be confused with the fact that we are looking for a needle in a very large haystack & that it could easily take decades.

Inccidently many people have already switched away from SETI ,partly for some more near term results amongst other reasons.

As for the rest Petrus says it very nicely :) .......well apart from the odd typo!;) ,& the last line ,that's just for him :D