Re: Science = 100% falsifiability? Really?

On Dec 13, 4:44 pm, Rupert Morrish <rup...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Seanpit wrote:
On Dec 13, 12:49 pm, richardalanforr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I've explained this to you dozens of times before. It is not enough
to search for signals which have characteristics of those made by
known processes if the particular known process can actually be
closely approximated by a non-deliberate natural process. That is why
SETI scientists do not simply look for what can or has been produced
by a known process. Known processes are known that can and have
produced very natural-looking signals.

Which is why SETI scientists are not looking for such signals!

Yes, because they are known to be naturally produced. They are
therefore looking for signals that are thought to be well beyond the
range of natural production.

Not true. The hydrogen line at 1.42GHz is exactly the sort of
narrow-band signal that SETI is looking for, and they are searching for
signals in the same frequency range (1GHz - 3GHz).

Hmmmmm . . . why then do you think SETI hasn't presented the narrow
band 1.42GHz signal as an artifact? Any suggestions? Hint: Because
it is known to have a natural non-deliberate cause. That's why. That
means that they are in fact looking for signals that are thought to be
well beyond the range of natural production.

Everyone gets the concept, but you seem to be ignoring the other half of
the grid - SETI are explicitly not searching for any signals that cannot
be made by humans.

I never said otherwise. It is quite hard to imagine a signal that
couldn't be made by humans (given limited power supplies that we have
available of course).

Known natural cause / Known artificial cause: Not searching
Known natural cause / Unknown artificial cause: Not searching
Unknown natural cause / Known artificial cause: SEARCHING
Unknown natural cause / Unknown artificial cause: Not searching

Again, finding a radio signal with an unknown natural cause would most
likely be within the range of what we humans could actually produce
(again, given that the signal was within our limited power supply
capabilities). So, finding a signal pattern, like something that
matches a particular mathematical formula, like pi, e, the Fibonacci
series, or various forms of complex signal symmetry, would be very
good evidence of artifact.

If we think it's an artifact, we can test hypotheses of how it was
created. If there's no tool marks, it doesn't mean it's not an artifact,
but it does mean that we don't know how it was made, and we should be
less confident that it is an artifact.

Tool marks can also be tricky. How are the tool marks themselves
made? You might know how they could be made, but that, by itself,
doesn't given you any clue if they are or are not artifactual
markings. The same thing is true for the object or phenomenon in
question. It is often very easy to determine how it could be made.
Yet, this is not enough. You also have to have at least some idea as
to how it could not be made.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Science = 100% falsifiability? Really?
    ... SETI has set it's search parameters to look for signals which have ... SETI scientists do not simply look for what can or has been produced ... produced very natural-looking signals. ... Would this be enough to tell artifact from ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Science = 100% falsifiability? Really?
    ... produced very natural-looking signals. ... That differentiation requires that SETI ... Would this be enough to tell artifact from ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Science = 100% falsifiability? Really?
    ... produced very natural-looking signals. ... The hydrogen line at 1.42GHz is exactly the sort of narrow-band signal that SETI is looking for, and they are searching for signals in the same frequency range. ... If we think it's an artifact, we can test hypotheses of how it was created. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Science = 100% falsifiability? Really?
    ... produced very natural-looking signals. ... Which is why SETI scientists are not looking for such signals! ... the grid - SETI are explicitly not searching for any signals that cannot ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Science = 100% falsifiability? Really?
    ... produced very natural-looking signals. ... Which is why SETI scientists are not looking for such signals! ... a likely artifact. ...
    (talk.origins)