We keep trying to extend our reach into the heavens, but the idea of panspermia is that the heavens are actually responsible for us. Which is to say, that at least the precursor materials that allow life to emerge came from elsewhere, and did not originate on Earth. Over a hundred years ago Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius suggested that the pressure of starlight could push bacterial spores between planets and we can extend the notion to interstellar journeys of hardy microbes as well, blasted out of planetary surfaces by such things as meteor impacts and flung into outbound trajectories. Panspermia notions inevitably get into the question of deep time given the distances involved. The German physician Hermann Richter (1808-1876) had something interesting to say about this, evidently motivated by his irritation with Charles Darwin, who had made no speculations on the origin of the life he studied. Richter believed in a universe that was eternal, and indeed thought that life itself...

The idea of life achieving a series of plateaus, each of which is a long and perilous slog, has serious implications for SETI. It was Brandon Carter, now at the Laboratoire Univers et Théories in Meudon, France, who proposed the notion of such ‘hard steps’ back in the early 1980s. Follow-up work by a number of authors, especially Frank Tipler and John Barrow (The Anthropic Cosmological Principle) has refined the concept and added to the steps Carter conceived. Since then, the idea that life might take a substantial amount of the lifetime of a star to emerge has bedeviled those who want to see a universe filled with technological civilizations. Each ‘hard step’ is unlikely in itself, and our existence depends upon our planet’s having achieved all of them. Carter was motivated by the timing of our emergence, which we can round off at 4.6 billion years after the formation of our planet. He reasoned that the upper limit for habitability at Earth’s surface is on the order of 5.6 billion...

As a quick follow-up to yesterday’s article on quantifying technosignature data, I want to mention the SETI Institute’s invitation for applicants to the Davie Postdoctoral Fellowship in Artificial Intelligence for Astronomy. The Institute’s Vishal Gajjar and his collaborators both in the US and at IIT Tirupati in India will be working with the chosen candidate to focus on neural networks optimized for processing image data, so-called ‘CNN architectures’ that can uncover unusual signals in massive datasets. “Machine learning is transforming the way we search for exoplanets, allowing us to uncover hidden patterns in vast datasets,” says Gajjar. “This fellowship will accelerate the development of advanced AI tools to detect not just conventional planets, but also exotic and unconventional transit signatures including potential technosignatures.” As AI matures, the exploration of datasets is a critical matter as these results from missions like TESS and Kepler are packed with both...

It’s one thing to talk about technology as we humans know it, but applying it to hypothetical extraterrestrials is another matter. We have to paint with a broad brush here. Thus Jason Wright’s explanation of technosignatures as conceived by SETI scientists. The Penn State astronomer and astrophysicist defines technology in that context as “the physical manifestations of deliberate engineering.” That’s saying that a technology produces something that is in principle observable. Whether or not our current detection methods are adequate to the task is another matter. Image: Artist’s concept of an interesting radio signal from galactic center. But the spectrum of possible technosignature detections is broad indeed, extending far beyond radio. Credit: UCLA SETI Group/Yuri Beletsky, Carnegie Las Campanas Observatory. A technosignature need not be the sign of industrial or scientific activity. Consider: In a new paper in The Astronomical Journal, Sofia Sheikh (SETI Institute) and colleagues...