Esta falta de resultados ha inducido a parte de la comunidad científica a proponer estrategias de búsqueda más invasivas, como puede ser el denominado SETI activo: emitir señales que atraigan la atención de hipotéticos alienígenas, con idea de que éstos actúen de manera análoga y podamos detectar su presencia. Sería algo así como llamar a la puerta para ver si la casa está habitada. Un enfoque más extremo es el denominado METI (Messaging to Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) planteado por el astrónomo ruso Alexander Zaitsev, y en el que la finalidad no es tanto llamar para obtener una respuesta, sino simplemente llamar para decir que existimos (el matiz es del propio Zaitsev, y a fuer de ser sinceros no demasiado relevante en términos prácticos).

Ha habido varios mensajes de este tipo, de los que quizás el más célebre fue el enviado desde Arecibo en 1974, y en cuyo diseño participaron entre otros Frank Drake y Carl Sagan. Este mensaje no llegará a su destino -M13, el Cúmulo de Hércules- hasta dentro de 26.000 años, por lo que se trata de un acto fundamentalmente simbólico. Otros mensajes posteriores como por ejemplo el Cosmic Call 2 sí llegarán en breve a su destino (Casiopea en 2036 en este caso). La cuestión es qué puede pasar si hubiera alguien escuchando. Más aún, ¿qué pasaría si el mensaje lo recibe una civilización hostil con medios técnicos suficientes para plantarse aquí?

Éste es un temor recurrente y bastante razonable (al menos en la misma medida de la propia idea de SETI), por lo que no puede obviarse a priori. No obstante, según los cálculos del propio Alexader Zaitsev, se trata de un riesgo independiente del propio METI. Para llegar a esa conclusión, Zaitsev ha estimado la fracción del firmamento iluminada por señales de astronomía radar y la duración de estas transmisiones, y ha cotejado esta estimación con la correspondiente a las señales METI. La comparativa puede verse en una pequeña comunicación titulada

• Detection Probability of Terrestrial Radio Signals by a Hostile Super-civilization

Para Zaitsev hay una relación de 1/2000 en la fracción de firmamento iluminado y de 1/500 en duración de la transmisión, siempre a favor de la astronomía radar. Por lo tanto -concluye- la probabilidad de que seamos detectados a través de nuestra actividad astronómica es un millón de veces superior a la de serlo debido a METI. Dado que no parece razonable pedir la supresión de la astronomía radar (sumamente útil por ejemplo para el estudio de NEOs), la conclusión sería que no hay que temer a METI. Sin entrar en consideraciones cuantitativas sobre la estimación de Zaitsev, y suponiendo que ésta es correcta, la cuestión que surge en cualquier caso es ¿para qué vamos a perder entonces el tiempo con METI (e incluso con SETI activo), si nuestra propia actividad tecnológica ya nos delata?

Mankind has always been driven by contradictory drives.  The relentless curiosity that pushes us forward and is directly responsible for our progress from caves to  cities.  The fear of change that tells us "hang on, these caves/cities are really nice, we don't want to risk losing them."  There isn't any greater potential threat to the status quo than the discovery of extraterrestrial life, which is why some people would prefer we didn't try.

There has been some outrage recently over attempts to contact intelligent aliens, where instead of hiding in the corner and listening real hard some astronomers beamed intense directional messages up up and away.  Critics decried these actions as dangerous, though their fears reveal more about us than any eventual ETs.  They assume that they would be similar to humanity, so their first response to finding a more primitive culture would be to exploit the hell out of it.  While such a fate might be pleasingly ironic (for anyone who isn't human, at least), others contend that any species that can make the journey here has advanced to a point where their goals are rather higher-minded than "Shoot us".

Dr Alexander Zaitzev, of the Institute of Radio Engineering and Electronics at the Russian Academy of Sciences, doesn't think much of these worries either way.  A proponent of METI (Messaging to Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence), in a recent paper he shows that the odds of one of the METI messages being detected is a millionth of that due to powerful radar pulses regularly used in astronomical investigation.  Though whether writing a paper saying "This METI thing we're doing has only a tiny chance of working" is overall a good idea remains to be seen.  An important point is that METI represents an intentional will to make contact, rather than the accidental alien interception of some random radiation from Earth - the difference between saying "Hello!" and just being a suspicious strange noise late at night.

Most of the objections to contacting aliens are weak under close examination.  We can't suddenly decide to hide after fifty years of pumping electromagnetic radiation into space without rhyme or reason - in fact, we'd better hope that an advanced civilization doesn't catch an episode of "American Idol" and just vaporize us outright.  Suddenly keeping quiet would be like a drunk boyfriend carefully taking off his shoes after knocking over a bookshelf on his way to the bedroom.

Then there's the assumption that aliens would have the same kind of technology we do - despite the extremely obvious fact that our technology can't actually get to other planets.  Any attempt to mask radio emissions will likely look like cavemen closing their eyes to hide from satellite imaging.

The simple fact is that certain people have always opposed progress while other, better people have driven it.  "Experts" decried boiled water as unhealthy compared the vital stuff straight from the river, cursed antibiotics as a temporary placebo, and confidently declared that computers were nothing but expensive toys.  As an intelligent species we must make every effort to contact anyone or thing we can - and if you don't like it, there are some lovely caves you can move back to.

Free movement of goods, labor, and capital oxygenate capitalism. In my April 15 post I pointed out Japan's innovative solution to a potentially implosive problem of labor shortage in its aging society. It's too early to tell if robotic technology will sustain its homogeneous society, but certainly no technology is revolutionary enough to invigorate its lackluster capital markets including the Nikkei. To do that, Japan need only to embrace foreign investors, but its distrust of foreigners impedes. Their biggest fear: takeovers of homegrown enterprises, and not just the hostile kind.

Typical of the ineffective and obtrusive nature of bureaucracy, Japan's METI (Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry) irrationally justifies the fear of foreign investors. The Wall Street Journal quotes a vice minister of METI in a speech earlier this year, "Are corporations the property of stockholders?" Stockholders are "stupid, greedy, adulterous, irresponsible and threatening...They are the type of people who just sell the stock if they get mad." Somebody please explain to this misinformed fellow that shareholders do, in fact, own corporations, and consistently successful shareholders who focus on the long-term aren't stupid, greedy, irresponsible, and threatening, although they might be adulterous.

Closing the investment market to foreigners who want a controlling interest in Japanese firms is backed by a visceral, altruistic response. Protection of jobs, loyalty to benevolent founders, and worry of reduced funding for research and development is touted. What's missing is the foreign influence to increase productivity and competitiveness through restructuring and more capital. Without foreign investment, Japan's companies may stagnate for years. Twenty five years from now, per capital G.D.P. in the dynamic South Korea may exceed Japan's, and this may be the catalyst for change for the proud nation of Japan.

1. La fameuse équation de Drake pourrait contenir de très petits facteurs, ayant pour conséquence qu'il n'y ait qu'une civilisation intelligence dans la Voie Lactée , nous, voire quelques autres mais qu'elles sont trop loin pour les capter.
2. Le dernier facteur de Drake est particulièrement intéressant, celui concernant la durée de vie moyenne d'une civilisation capable de communiquer à travers l'Univers. Certains pessimistes (comme Yves...) imaginent que cette durée puisse être courte en raison d'une tendance à l'autodestruction.
3. Les optimistes auraient plutôt tendance à penser que les progrès rapides de la technologie rendent les ondes radio rapidement obsolètes comme moyen de communication. Nous sommes incapables actuellement de capter des flux de neutrinos modulés ou d'extraire des photons intriqués par exemple, et nous ne soupçonnons pas que l'explosion d'une supernova puisse être l'oeuvre d'une civilisation de type II, encore moins qu'une type III fasse traverser le disque d'accrétion d'un trou noir par un autre juste pour dire bonjour...
4. Peut-être que les civilisations réellement intelligentes n'émettent pas. Et c'est une question très importante : a-t-on intérêt à envoyer des signaux dans l'espace ?
   Pour le professeur Alexander L. Zaitsev, SETI n'a pas de sens sans son projet "Active SETI" ou METI (Messaging to Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) qui a déjà effectué plusieurs puissantes émissions de signaux vers les étoiles.
   D'autres comme l'auteur de science fiction David Brin estiment que cette activité est dangereuse car elle révèle la position d'une planète habitable à des ennemis potentiels. (Je partage ce point de vue, en le fondant sur mon Principe de Saturation Cubique)
   La question a été suffisamment importante pour que l' International Academy of Astronautics mette au point en 2005 l'Echelle de San Marin, qui définit une échelle de risque de 1 à 10 en fonction de la puissance d'émission et de la nature du message. L'idée est que des autorités politiques internationales devraient autoriser l'émission de messages risqués, notamment la réponse à un message reçu.

Sources:

• "Call into the Cosmos", 2008, Centauri Dreams
• David Brin, "Shouting at the Cosmos ...Or How SETI has Taken a Worrisome Turn Into Dangerous Territory ", 2006
• Larry Klaes, "Should We Shout into the Darkness?", 2008, Astrogator’s Logs

The application to increase stock holdings in J-Power was made by the UK-based 'The Children's Investment Fund' (TCI). The two ministries judged that an increase in the influence of TCI in the management of J-Power would create risks with regard to the stable supply of electricity and the safe management and disposal of nuclear fuel.

The two ministries, under the Foreign Echange and Foreign Trade Law, will call a meeting of the Special Foreign Section of the Customs and Foreign Exchange Deliberation Committee on 11th April. It is the first time that a 'worrying investment' has led to such a meeting being called. The committee will review the TCI's intentions and hear explanations from members and experts before deciding whether or not to issue a warning to the fund's management.

Under the Foreign Exchange Law, national approval must be obtained before more than 10% of the stock of an electricity producer can be held by a foreign investor. In January TCI applied for an increase in their holdings to 20% of total stock. The deadline for deliberations on the Japanese side is 14th May, but this may be extended by a month by the Special Foreign Section of the Customs and Foreign Exchange Deliberation Committee. In the meantime, an increase in TCI stock holdings in J-Power will not be possible. TCI have taken the stance that 'The Japanese market is a closed system' and, if the government issues a warning, a full-on confrontation is expected.

J-Power sells electricity to the ten major electricity producers in Japan. Company infrastructure includes an electricity distribution network and frequency transformer stations, and the company is planning a large nuclear power station in Aomori prefecture.

Robot de Servicio

Kyushu University
Hitachi, Ltd
Hitachi Medical Corp
MIZUHO Co, Ltd
Universidad de Tokio
Universidad de Waseda

Credit:

NASA/GSFC/METI/ERSDAC/JAROS,
and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team

Description:

On December 19, 2006 ASTER captured this image of Karymsky volcano erupting in the Russian Far East. Karymsky is one of numerous active volcanoes on the Kamchatka peninsula in Russian Siberia. The hot spot on the volcano summit is highlighted in the thermal bands in red and yellow, as is an area of the southeast flank, possibly indicating a pyroclastic flow. An obvious ash track is seen as a triangular dark area covering the countryside to the east of the summit. The short white streak emanating ESE from the summit is probably a water vapor cloud. The image covers an area of 26.5 x 22.6 km, and is located near 54.1 degrees north latitude and 159.3 degrees east longitude.

Primo giorno di lavoro e si incominicia a pianificare il tutto. L'obiettivo finale è di integrare il mio lavoro nel manichino...insomma una sorta di tentativo di resuscitare qualcosa che è morto da sempre...una specie di spaventapasseri tipo mago di OZ che cerca il suo cervello disperatamente...un Frankestein dei tempi nostri!

Beh vedremo cosa si potrà fare...per ora mi sono limitato a "giocare" con il manichino (CPR, ECG ecc.)...

P.S.

La macchina è una Dodge Neon datata...cambio automatico, aria condizionata (come tutte le macchine americane...anche le più vecchie!!!), bianca...niente di speciale...però mi porta in giro!