Project Cyclops, A Design... - Department of Earth and Planetary ...
Project Cyclops, A Design... - Department of Earth and Planetary ...
Project Cyclops, A Design... - Department of Earth and Planetary ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
I--<br />
g<br />
u.<br />
O<br />
>-<br />
I---<br />
.d<br />
tit<br />
(]O<br />
0<br />
0.<br />
1.0<br />
.8<br />
.6<br />
.4<br />
.2<br />
0<br />
I0<br />
I<br />
Figure 6-3.<br />
P- i_O(_Bll'IT'f 'P_I_'STAROf 'DETECTING A 'SIGIIAL<br />
io-3,0-4,0-5 jo-_<br />
I0 2 10 3<br />
RANGE,light years<br />
, i , i i1,,<br />
I I L I i[ll<br />
Probability <strong>of</strong> contact versus range.<br />
However, we must concede at least this much<br />
uncertainty in p. If civilizations typically radiate megawatts<br />
<strong>of</strong> power for their own purposes for 107 years we<br />
might assign p the value 10-3 <strong>and</strong> be able to eavesdrop<br />
on their signals out to some 60 to 100 light-years. If, on<br />
the other h<strong>and</strong>, they typically radiate beacons for 104<br />
years, then p might be as low as 10-6 <strong>and</strong> the beacons<br />
would have to be detectable at 600 to 1000 light-years.<br />
Beyond 1000 light-years the situation becomes rather<br />
bleak. Not only does the cube law fail, but also the<br />
radiative epoch becomes shorter than the round-trip<br />
delay making two-way exchange unlikely. We cannot,<br />
however, exclude the possibility that very advanced<br />
races exist beyond this range, <strong>and</strong> have constructed very<br />
powerful beacons <strong>and</strong> have used them for unknown<br />
purposes for very long times, perhaps for aeons.<br />
We must also point out that the curves <strong>of</strong> Figure 6-3<br />
do not give a true picture <strong>of</strong> what happens as the<br />
sensitivity <strong>of</strong> a receiver is increased, for as we increase<br />
our receiver sensitivity, we not only extend the range for<br />
a given radiated power, we also permit the detection <strong>of</strong><br />
weaker radiation from sources already within range, so<br />
to speak. To the extent that beacons are less likely than<br />
radio leakage, this capability increases the value we<br />
should<br />
assign to p for the nearer stars.<br />
Since the range we must cover is so uncertain, only<br />
some general conclusions emerge:<br />
1. We should start the search with a modest system<br />
capable <strong>of</strong> detecting beacons ,_t to perhaps 100<br />
light-years.<br />
2. We should exp<strong>and</strong> the system as the search<br />
proceeds (<strong>and</strong> is repeated) <strong>and</strong> continue the<br />
expansion until success is achieved or until we are<br />
able to eavesdrop on unintended radiation from<br />
100 light-years range. The system should then be<br />
able to detect beacons <strong>of</strong> reasonable power at<br />
1000 light-years range.<br />
3. If technologically feasible at any time we may<br />
10 4<br />
want to search for more distant powerful sources,<br />
perhaps even to scan other galaxies.<br />
THE NUMBER OF RESOLVABLE DIRECTIONS<br />
The number <strong>of</strong> distinct directions in which an<br />
antenna must be pointed to cover the sky is proportional<br />
to its gain. An isotropic antenna has a gain <strong>of</strong> 1, <strong>and</strong><br />
would need to be "pointed" in only one direction; an<br />
antenna radiating uniformly into a hemisphere would<br />
have a gain <strong>of</strong> two <strong>and</strong> would need to be pointed in two<br />
directions. Similarly, any antenna radiating uniformly<br />
into a solid angle _2 would have a gain 41r/[2 <strong>and</strong> would<br />
need to be pointed in this many directions. Actual<br />
antennas do not have a uniform gain inside a given solid<br />
angle <strong>and</strong> zero gain outside, <strong>and</strong> the number <strong>of</strong><br />
directions in which we must point them depends on the<br />
loss we are willing to tolerate at the edge <strong>of</strong> each area<br />
covered by the beam.<br />
If the aperture is circular the beam intensity is given<br />
by equation (2), Chapter 5, <strong>and</strong> if Ord/X) 0 = 1 the loss<br />
at the edges is about 1.1 dB. If we accept this as<br />
tolerable then 0ma x = Xhrd <strong>and</strong> the solid angle covered<br />
per beam is<br />
\Ttd/<br />
The number <strong>of</strong> resolvable directions is therefore<br />
g<br />
(5)<br />
4_<br />
N = _ = 4g<br />
I'z<br />
(6)<br />
Our requirement <strong>of</strong> 1.1 dB maximum loss results in<br />
four times as many pointing directions as would be<br />
needed with a uniform conical beam.<br />
Figure 6-4 shows N as a function <strong>of</strong> operating<br />
wavelength for circular antennas <strong>of</strong> different diameters.<br />
We see that N is a large number even for antennas <strong>of</strong> the<br />
size we might use for array elements. For example, a<br />
100-m dish operating at 20 cm would have l0 T fields <strong>of</strong><br />
view in the sky. Figure 6-2 indicates that out to 1000<br />
light-years there would be about 1.7×106 slars <strong>of</strong><br />
interest in the sky. Even if we image the entire field <strong>of</strong><br />
view <strong>of</strong> the array element, we will have only 0.17 stars<br />
<strong>of</strong> interest per field, on the average. With I 0-m dishes we<br />
could average 17 stars per field, but we would need I00<br />
times as many dishes to realize a given total array<br />
diameter. The simultaneous searching <strong>of</strong> several stars<br />
does not appear too feasible.<br />
55