01.09.2014 Views

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 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!