Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 126 posts

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#91

Post by BatFastard »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #40
eightails wrote: post #5

How hard is it for people to just admit that we probably have inadequate evidence to reach a solid conclusion. This was the first object of its kind and we had very limited observations of it. From what I've read, none of the hypotheses regarding the measured acceleration (e.g. outgassing vs manufactured solar sail) can really be backed up in any substantial way. So it seems disengenuous to get into vitriolic argumen…

The reason we have inadequate evidence is the relatively low priority of SETI compared to other science. SETI has literally been living off financial scraps for decades. If a couple of billionaires hadn't funded efforts with very generous personal donations there would be almost no SETI at all. And if SETI had been funded properly - which would still be a drop in the ocean compared to other government spending, natio…

It could be that the government knows ETs exist, so it is pretty much of a moot point to spend money on searching for them.

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#92

Post by voldacar »

The last two paragraphs are so incredibly lame. The goal of a scientist's life isn't to be "respected by the community." Science and reality don't care what the community thinks and never have.

I have no idea if Loeb is right or not. I think for Bayesian reasons (prior is Borisov) he is probably wrong, but there is so little data and Oumuamua is certainly super weird. But this author is a total hack, making arguments from authority and mainstream-ness. If a scientist stops making relevant arguments and instead starts talking about the "consensus" of the "scientific community", run the opposite direction

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#93

Post by ignoranceprior »

dqpb wrote: post #88
ignoranceprior wrote: post #83

What about that Israeli military official who claimed that there was a Galactic Federation of aliens? Could this be one of their probes?

Uh, link please?

https://www.jpost.com/omg/former-israeli-space-security-chie...

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#94

Post by PopsiclePete »

BatFastard wrote: post #91
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason we have inadequate evidence is the relatively low priority of SETI compared to other science. SETI has literally been living off financial scraps for decades. If a couple of billionaires hadn't funded efforts with very generous personal donations there would be almost no SETI at all. And if SETI had been funded properly - which would still be a drop in the ocean compared to other government spending, natio…

It could be that the government knows ETs exist, so it is pretty much of a moot point to spend money on searching for them.

Twenty years ago, I'd have been more willing to agree with that. I could see the US Gov't as some sort of sinister, hyper-competent (and even malevolent?) force that could definitely keep a secret like that forever from us, and "disappear" those that get too nosy.

Now? Not so much. Looking at who our "representatives" are - failed football coaches, regular conspiracy nuts - there's no way in hell that this "knowledge" would remain locked away for years, decades. Not with clowns like these in charge.

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#95

Post by saberdancer »

annoyingnoob wrote: post #29

How do we jump to the conclusion of aliens with so little information? Why not God sent it?

Oumuamua changed velocity in an unexplained way. This was not expected, but there is an explanation that the object is outgassing and it increases it's velocity.

This, along with strange shape made the object interesting for ET speculation.

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#96

Post by giantrobot »

sandworm101 wrote: post #86
giantrobot wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's unlikely many types of exoplanets could have been detected "decades" earlier. Transit and Doppler detection methods require good seeing power and accurate intensity measurements. It takes large mirrors with good optics for good seeing power and sensitive electronics for the spectral/intensity measurements. Those two things weren't readily available until the past few decades...which surprise is when exoplanet di…

>> It's unlikely many types of exoplanets Ya, but if people were allowed to look for hot jupiters in the 70s/80s they would have found the first exoplanet far sooner.

Allowed? No one was banned from looking for Hot Jupiters. They weren't an expected phenomenon. The instruments to detect them also didn't/barely exist in the 70s and 80s and they're some of the easiest exoplanets to detect.

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#97

Post by jzer0cool »

A while back there was something known as the SETI Project which I could run on my machine. It would collect data from the skies.

I'm curious to know SETI project (or something else) was able to capture any data from the skies as well? The skies are monitored and maybe there is some data, somewhere, as an interesting area for us to all explore.

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#98

Post by chairmanwow1 »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #64

What a hit piece. Interesting read but wow this really feels like one guy is annoyed with another guy and decided to write about him in this thinly veiled article.

Yeah this article left a pretty sour taste in mouth. Every interview I've heard with Loeb has been pretty interesting and humble as he purports a new theory.

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#99

Post by api »

sandworm101 wrote: post #7
ckozlowski wrote: post #4

I'd gotten the impression that Loeb isn't trying to convince the public and scientific community that it was an alien probe so much as is he trying to show it could have been. I think is agenda is to get the community looking for these things more often, perhaps out of some disappointment that if it had been an actual probe (a la "Rendezvous with Rama"), we'd already have missed it. Whether it's worth bending the sci…

His battle is only partly about Oumuamua. That is just a vehicle for his arguments. The real issue is the bias against life detection experiments generally. Want to sample soil on mars and measure oxygen absorption? Great. We will put your sensor on the next rover. Want to pour nutrients on that soil and see if anything eats it? Go away you crazy person. Want to detect methane in an exoplanet atmosphere? Here is your…

At least one Mars lander has discovered ice and evidence of briny water beneath the soil. The fact that we have not sent a microscope just baffles me.

I do get the sense that for whatever reason there is a bias against explicitly looking for life. I don't think there's a big conspiracy explanation. I personally think it's what I call the "boring universe brigade," the skeptic ideology that came to dominate science starting in the 1970s that treats fascination as a contrarian indicator. "If it really fascinates people it's probably bullshit."

If there's anything beyond that bias it's probably a fear of triggering fundamentalists.

Edit:

Here's one bit of evidence for possible near surface water at a landing site:

https://www.space.com/209-life-mars-scientist-claims.html

Re: The Uncensored Guide to ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, and That Harvard Astronomer

#100

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

sandworm101 wrote: post #7
ckozlowski wrote: post #4

I'd gotten the impression that Loeb isn't trying to convince the public and scientific community that it was an alien probe so much as is he trying to show it could have been. I think is agenda is to get the community looking for these things more often, perhaps out of some disappointment that if it had been an actual probe (a la "Rendezvous with Rama"), we'd already have missed it. Whether it's worth bending the sci…

His battle is only partly about Oumuamua. That is just a vehicle for his arguments. The real issue is the bias against life detection experiments generally. Want to sample soil on mars and measure oxygen absorption? Great. We will put your sensor on the next rover. Want to pour nutrients on that soil and see if anything eats it? Go away you crazy person. Want to detect methane in an exoplanet atmosphere? Here is your…

Astronomers are extremely interested in detecting biosognatures in exoplanet atmospheres. This is one of the hottest topics in astronomy right now. They're just not interested in idle speculation about whether or not Oumuamua is a light sail. If there were some measurement that could be done to learn more about Oumuamua, then astronomers would do it, but it's a tiny object that's quite far away now. Most astronomers simply believe that the most likely explanation for the anomalous acceleration is that there was some undetected outgassing from the rock. That's much more plausible than the idea that this one particular object is an alien spaceship - not because there couldn't be alien spaceships somewhere out there, but because there are so many rocks floating around in space.

The one thing that you really can't get funding for is SETI, but that's not the fault of astronomers. That's the fault of congresspeople who ridiculed the search for "little green men" in the 1990s and barred NASA from funding it. Almost all astronomy funding comes from governments, so a government ban on funding a particular line of research means that that research basically won't happen.

Post reply on HN