70 AUSTRALIAN SKY & TELESCOPE July 2018
IN MARCH I ATTENDED a SETI
Institute workshop, where a
multidisciplinary group of astronomers,
neuroscientists, anthropologists,
philosophers and historians pondered
new approaches to expanding the
search for extraterrestrial intelligence.
Discussions ranged from the physics
of planet formation, through the origin
and evolution of life and the prospects
for complex life and intelligence,
to forthcoming hunts for both
biosignatures and ‘technosignatures’
on exoplanets.
To me, the way these topics flowed
together at the meeting served as a
reminder that the distinction between
astrobiology and SETI is completely
artificial. It might exist in terms of
bureaucracies and funding streams, but
intellectually the quest to know how
we — and living things in general — fit
into the universe is all part of the same
nested series of questions.
How does matter turn into living
cells? Is this unlikely or inevitable?
What is required of a planet to support
this and the subsequent transitions
to differentiated cells, multicellular
life, cognition, curiosity and
technology? What planetary transitions
accompanied, enabled or were causedby these biological leaps? Could these
have occurred on other types of planets
that we know or suspect exist, and how
would we recognise them?
For the future of SETI, the practical
questions are, regrettably, as vexing
as the intellectual ones. Few would
deny how far-reaching success would
be, but how do you maintain funding
and scientific interest in a field where
the payoff in any given year (or even
decade) is so uncertain?
Not long ago, many deemed
exobiology, along with SETI, as a fringe
field, which ‘serious’ researchers must
keep at arm’s length. In the 1990s,
anti-intellectual budget cutters in the
US Congress discontinued all US federal
government support for SETI. In 1998,
attitudes changed. This came about
largely due to the discovery of possible
microfossils in a meteorite from Mars
and the subsequent flurry of scientific
and public excitement. It turned out
to be a false alarm, but exobiology
was rechristened as ‘astrobiology’ and
suddenly became acceptable, well-
funded, and even thought central to
NASA’s mission.
In terms of government backing,
however, SETI remains out in the cold.
Maybe it needs its own highly crediblefalse alarm! In the meantime, how do
SETI researchers, year in and year out,
remain engaged and positive?
At the workshop, you couldn’t
help but notice that among the most
engaged and positive participants
were the now ‘retired’ SETI pioneers
Frank Drake and Jill Tarter. Their
enthusiasm doesn’t depend upon
immediate gratification. Both clearly
believe, as do I, that we are not alone,
that these efforts will ultimately pay
off, and that whether we live to see
it or not, we’re contributing to
something extremely important and
larger than ourselves.
With new technologies and search
strategies coming into play, with all the
exoplanets that astronomers will soon
bring into focus, and with people like
Tarter and Drake willing to spend their
entire careers on the quest — the odds
be damned — I believe we have many
reasons to be hopeful.■ DAVID GRINSPOON gave a paper at
the SETI workshop entitled, “Cognitive
Planetary Transitions: An Astrobiological
Perspective on the ‘Sapiezoic Eon’”. He
coined the term to denote a theoretical
time when cognitive processes become
integrated into a planet’s functioning. SETH SHOSTAK / SETI INSTITUTEAdvancing
the SETI
quest
Hope, perseverance, and the
courage of their convictions
sustain those seeking hints
of alien civilisations.Seven days per week, the
SETI Institute uses the
Allen Telescope Array in
California to search for
alien signals.COSMIC RELIEF by David Grinspoon