6 ms·

There's a project that's going well from NASA for this. Still a moonshot but they've progressed through the early stages well so far. https://www.nasa.gov/gene

by PxldLtd 2mo ago

There's a project that's going well from NASA for this. Still a moonshot but they've progressed through the early stages well so far. https://www.nasa.gov/general/direct-multipixel-imaging-and-spectroscopy-of-an-exoplanet-with-a-solar-gravitational-lens-mission/ https://www.nasa.gov/general/direct-multipixel-imaging-and-s...

echelon 2mo ago
I wonder about all the extraterrestrial AI swarms that have already imaged earth. Surely it has happened. They must have all spotted our planet millions of years ago and must be watching us with a continuous high-resolution feed. They've seen our dinosaurs. Their interest will really be piqued when they finally see us invent electricity, though that might be some time in the future for them. Perhaps even gravitational lensing is primitive to them. Perhaps they're able to break and manipulate physics and peer directly into our light cone, breaking the speed of light. Perhaps through direct wormholes they're already here - computronium in the very oxygen atoms that surround us. In rock silicates, in the air you breathe, in your hemes, in your brain. Calculating. But perhaps we're the only intelligent species in the entire universe. That is also a possibility. Some big names in astrophysics, such as David Kipping, suggest strongly that we should not rule out that hypothesis. I find his suggestions haunting and beautiful at the same time. You need to watch his videos, and this is a good start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEmYU8Y_rI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEmYU8Y_rI And finally, it may be that we're all just a historical simulation. Or maybe that's ascribing too much importance to ourselves. Maybe we're just a slop simulation on some AI's plaything, existing for no reason at all. Background NPCs with self-importance, ephemeral existences. But procedural generation at scale isn't really all too different from the laws of the physical universe itself. The scale of the universe fills me with awe. Every time I think about it, my worries about random algo-rage and clickbait fades away to nothing. It deeply contextualizes our short time here.
- imjonse 2mo ago
  >But perhaps we're the only intelligent species in the entire universe. That is also a possibility. Some big names in astrophysics, such as David Kipping, suggest strongly that we should not rule out that hypothesis They may be planted by alien AI to lull us into false sense of security.
- conductr 2mo ago
  This comment encapsulates how poorly we humans are at accepting unknowns. For me, that explains a lot of our belief systems. The fact we can’t just take the unknown but instead have to fill in the blanks with what ifs. and create a narrative like we know anything about the unknown thing. It helps us feel like we understand it more. That’s literally how religions and a lot of other things get created, it’s a pattern, then the logical person sees the patterns and say it’s a simulation. A quite predictable filling of another blank.
  - The_Blade 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    - ethersteeds 2mo ago
      That would be me.
    - adamredwoods 2mo ago
      Abdication syndrome.
    - deleted 2mo ago
      [deleted]
  - mlyle 2mo ago
    > and create a narrative like we know anything about the unknown thing. It helps us feel like we understand it more. In fairness, this very often helps us understand the unknown thing more.
  - kelipso 2mo ago
    It’s how science and discoveries are done too…
  - jaapz 2mo ago
    "dunno" is just a really unsatisfying answer to anything Currently we don't know a lot of things - but without trying out new ideas how are you ever going to know?
- awfulneutral 2mo ago
  If they let me watch the videos of our dinosaurs, I would happily let them use my hemes for their calculations.
- jzu48 2mo ago
  As Lynn Margulis reminded us we are not the main show. Our individual intelligence is highly over rated. The brain itself is kludge upon kludge accumulating over thousands of years, to solve problems that keep changing with time and environmental changes. Its quite a piece of crap actually if you tabulate all the accumulated junk. We arent as interesting as we think we are. Some of the tech and knowledge generated might be interesting. But compare it with to photosynthesis or butterfly metamorphosis or the fact that microbes can double their population in a few hours, all of which is happening without needing any human intelligence. So they may very well be watching but are more curious about a rose or a redwood tree than all the random and superficial activity the chimp brain produces.
  - QuercusMax 2mo ago
    I'd be impressed if those microbes or butterflies visited the moon and came back to tell about it.
    - kakacik 2mo ago
      Maybe visiting moon is overrated. We can't know, we have very narrow tube vision centered around our rather primitive lives. Effectively immortal organisms may be more impressive. Or those surviving in anaerobis boiling water conditions. Or fixing radiation defects like its nothing. Or vacuum. Or...
  - shevy-java 2mo ago
    > But compare it with to photosynthesis Artifical solar capture systems exist. Synthetic biology also bridges that gap as well and the genetic basis is known and has been manipulated. Granted, coming up with more efficient photosynthesis is very hard, but I don't share your "we humans are stupid" opinion here at all whatsoever. > or butterfly metamorphosis Nothing fascinating here. It is just a genetic program. Viruses have similar programs too - yes, no metamorphosis, but take retroviruses and the syncytium. Mammals only reproduce thanks to retroviruses (not 100% correct, but look at this here: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0707873105 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0707873105) > or the fact that microbes can double their population in a few hours Wow, we humans surely do not have cells that double. Oh wait ... nevermind. Humans consist of cells. Who would have thought... Yes, microbes are much faster, but they don't have to coordinate as much as humans do in 3D, not even in a bacterial biofilm. And we have to double a lot more DNA than bacteria do, so of course they are faster. > about a rose or a redwood tree than all the random and superficial activity the chimp brain produces That comparison is weird. A rose is thinking as much as a chimp brain? The human brain is special. Chimps are very clever too but humans have very solid abstract thinking. Animals have this too, to some extent (predator hunting prey, chimps have hunting strategies) but e. g. look at mathematics - animals don't waste their time coming up with higher order theorems.
- mr_toad 2mo ago
  I doubt any new physics will be needed, just computational imaging, meta-optics, very long baselines (multi AU, or even light years).
- ErigmolCt 2mo ago
  I do not really believe the wormholes or computronium scenario, but letting my mind run through those possibilities resets my sense of scale
- rixed 2mo ago
  > all the extraterrestrial AI swarms It's expected that a human would associate life with intelligence, but it's also a bit of a contradiction because it does not seem very intelligent to do so given all we know about the history of life on our planet.
bradley13 2mo ago
Wow. 25km resolution of the exoplanet's surface. Of course, getting the telescope into place, steering it, etc. - that's the hard part.
Something1234 2mo ago
What would a 25km resolution of earth look like
- holoduke 2mo ago
  Enough to see cities
  - 27183 2mo ago
    A more cautious civilization might take measures to prevent emissions. There's potentially great value in remaining unnoticed.
    - thecommakozzi 2mo ago
      [dead]
- mikepurvis 2mo ago
  Earth is 12700 km in diameter, so such an image would be 688 pixels across. Basically you won't be reading license plates but you'd see enough to identify evidence of very large scale construction, and with multiple images over time I bet you could draw even more conclusions.
  - escapecharacter 2mo ago
    We could make a license plate big enough that aliens could see it and know we are sophisticated.
    - prerok 2mo ago
      Nah, let's just put a big sign "Kilroy was here", so they don't bother with the "mostly harmless" planet.
    - kazinator 2mo ago
      If four out of seven digits were blurred out, then they would really see how sophisticated we are: we have the concept of privacy!
neom 2mo ago
Great in depth youtube video on this project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go-50Dpzs20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go-50Dpzs20
- hparadiz 2mo ago
  This requires sending something to at least about 548 AU and then effect falls off from there but anything you send that far will be going at a velocity that would keep it going. You would be in effective range for some time but basically you'd need to keep sending satellites to that distance in order to keep using the technique. You'd also want to send them into different directions in order to image different parts of the sky.
  - ant6n 2mo ago
    It’s basically imaging one exoplanet per satellite. Would be good to figure out a way to slow down at 500 AU. In order to maximize the time for observation.
    - dyauspitr 2mo ago
      With a Jupiter/solar oberth boost we can at best do around 20 AU per year, so best case scenario it would take atleast 25 years to get there, which honestly isn’t bad at all. For comparison voyager does around 3.6 AU/year.
      - hparadiz 2mo ago
        A series of permanent stations near the vicinity of the oberth burns at Jupiter and the sun could add a lot of Delta V by firing a laser at the probe and the probe could fire one back. Even more so if it was a series of laser boosters strategically placed around the solar system. The numbers start to get really crazy.
    - hparadiz 2mo ago
      It would be most likely a whole solar system. Consider that new horizons only had hours during its flyby to collect all the telemetry that it did. Imagine having 600 pixels of resolution for an exo planet for up to 15 years. Plus all the other telemetry you'll be collecting about the galactic space near us.
Nition 2mo ago
It's just a funny little thing but I love how in a world of "megapixel" and even "gigapixel" space images we have here a "multipixel" imaging of planets, due to achieving a resolution of several pixels. Though the 25km resolution mentioned actually sounds far, far better than the very pixellated planet in the "artist’s depiction". I suppose it depends how small and far away the planet is.

by PxldLtd 2mo ago

echelon 2mo ago

I wonder about all the extraterrestrial AI swarms that have already imaged earth. Surely it has happened. They must have all spotted our planet millions of years ago and must be watching us with a continuous high-resolution feed. They've seen our dinosaurs. Their interest will really be piqued when they finally see us invent electricity, though that might be some time in the future for them. Perhaps even gravitational lensing is primitive to them. Perhaps they're able to break and manipulate physics and peer directly into our light cone, breaking the speed of light. Perhaps through direct wormholes they're already here - computronium in the very oxygen atoms that surround us. In rock silicates, in the air you breathe, in your hemes, in your brain. Calculating. But perhaps we're the only intelligent species in the entire universe. That is also a possibility. Some big names in astrophysics, such as David Kipping, suggest strongly that we should not rule out that hypothesis. I find his suggestions haunting and beautiful at the same time. You need to watch his videos, and this is a good start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEmYU8Y_rI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEmYU8Y_rI And finally, it may be that we're all just a historical simulation. Or maybe that's ascribing too much importance to ourselves. Maybe we're just a slop simulation on some AI's plaything, existing for no reason at all. Background NPCs with self-importance, ephemeral existences. But procedural generation at scale isn't really all too different from the laws of the physical universe itself. The scale of the universe fills me with awe. Every time I think about it, my worries about random algo-rage and clickbait fades away to nothing. It deeply contextualizes our short time here.

imjonse 2mo ago
>But perhaps we're the only intelligent species in the entire universe. That is also a possibility. Some big names in astrophysics, such as David Kipping, suggest strongly that we should not rule out that hypothesis They may be planted by alien AI to lull us into false sense of security.
conductr 2mo ago
This comment encapsulates how poorly we humans are at accepting unknowns. For me, that explains a lot of our belief systems. The fact we can’t just take the unknown but instead have to fill in the blanks with what ifs. and create a narrative like we know anything about the unknown thing. It helps us feel like we understand it more. That’s literally how religions and a lot of other things get created, it’s a pattern, then the logical person sees the patterns and say it’s a simulation. A quite predictable filling of another blank.
- The_Blade 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - ethersteeds 2mo ago
    That would be me.
  - adamredwoods 2mo ago
    Abdication syndrome.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
- mlyle 2mo ago
  > and create a narrative like we know anything about the unknown thing. It helps us feel like we understand it more. In fairness, this very often helps us understand the unknown thing more.
- kelipso 2mo ago
  It’s how science and discoveries are done too…
- jaapz 2mo ago
  "dunno" is just a really unsatisfying answer to anything Currently we don't know a lot of things - but without trying out new ideas how are you ever going to know?
awfulneutral 2mo ago
If they let me watch the videos of our dinosaurs, I would happily let them use my hemes for their calculations.
jzu48 2mo ago
As Lynn Margulis reminded us we are not the main show. Our individual intelligence is highly over rated. The brain itself is kludge upon kludge accumulating over thousands of years, to solve problems that keep changing with time and environmental changes. Its quite a piece of crap actually if you tabulate all the accumulated junk. We arent as interesting as we think we are. Some of the tech and knowledge generated might be interesting. But compare it with to photosynthesis or butterfly metamorphosis or the fact that microbes can double their population in a few hours, all of which is happening without needing any human intelligence. So they may very well be watching but are more curious about a rose or a redwood tree than all the random and superficial activity the chimp brain produces.
- QuercusMax 2mo ago
  I'd be impressed if those microbes or butterflies visited the moon and came back to tell about it.
  - kakacik 2mo ago
    Maybe visiting moon is overrated. We can't know, we have very narrow tube vision centered around our rather primitive lives. Effectively immortal organisms may be more impressive. Or those surviving in anaerobis boiling water conditions. Or fixing radiation defects like its nothing. Or vacuum. Or...
- shevy-java 2mo ago
  > But compare it with to photosynthesis Artifical solar capture systems exist. Synthetic biology also bridges that gap as well and the genetic basis is known and has been manipulated. Granted, coming up with more efficient photosynthesis is very hard, but I don't share your "we humans are stupid" opinion here at all whatsoever. > or butterfly metamorphosis Nothing fascinating here. It is just a genetic program. Viruses have similar programs too - yes, no metamorphosis, but take retroviruses and the syncytium. Mammals only reproduce thanks to retroviruses (not 100% correct, but look at this here: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0707873105 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0707873105) > or the fact that microbes can double their population in a few hours Wow, we humans surely do not have cells that double. Oh wait ... nevermind. Humans consist of cells. Who would have thought... Yes, microbes are much faster, but they don't have to coordinate as much as humans do in 3D, not even in a bacterial biofilm. And we have to double a lot more DNA than bacteria do, so of course they are faster. > about a rose or a redwood tree than all the random and superficial activity the chimp brain produces That comparison is weird. A rose is thinking as much as a chimp brain? The human brain is special. Chimps are very clever too but humans have very solid abstract thinking. Animals have this too, to some extent (predator hunting prey, chimps have hunting strategies) but e. g. look at mathematics - animals don't waste their time coming up with higher order theorems.
mr_toad 2mo ago
I doubt any new physics will be needed, just computational imaging, meta-optics, very long baselines (multi AU, or even light years).
ErigmolCt 2mo ago
I do not really believe the wormholes or computronium scenario, but letting my mind run through those possibilities resets my sense of scale
rixed 2mo ago
> all the extraterrestrial AI swarms It's expected that a human would associate life with intelligence, but it's also a bit of a contradiction because it does not seem very intelligent to do so given all we know about the history of life on our planet.

bradley13 2mo ago

Wow. 25km resolution of the exoplanet's surface. Of course, getting the telescope into place, steering it, etc. - that's the hard part.

Something1234 2mo ago

What would a 25km resolution of earth look like

holoduke 2mo ago
Enough to see cities
- 27183 2mo ago
  A more cautious civilization might take measures to prevent emissions. There's potentially great value in remaining unnoticed.
  - thecommakozzi 2mo ago
    [dead]
mikepurvis 2mo ago
Earth is 12700 km in diameter, so such an image would be 688 pixels across. Basically you won't be reading license plates but you'd see enough to identify evidence of very large scale construction, and with multiple images over time I bet you could draw even more conclusions.
- escapecharacter 2mo ago
  We could make a license plate big enough that aliens could see it and know we are sophisticated.
  - prerok 2mo ago
    Nah, let's just put a big sign "Kilroy was here", so they don't bother with the "mostly harmless" planet.
  - kazinator 2mo ago
    If four out of seven digits were blurred out, then they would really see how sophisticated we are: we have the concept of privacy!

neom 2mo ago

Great in depth youtube video on this project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go-50Dpzs20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go-50Dpzs20

hparadiz 2mo ago
This requires sending something to at least about 548 AU and then effect falls off from there but anything you send that far will be going at a velocity that would keep it going. You would be in effective range for some time but basically you'd need to keep sending satellites to that distance in order to keep using the technique. You'd also want to send them into different directions in order to image different parts of the sky.
- ant6n 2mo ago
  It’s basically imaging one exoplanet per satellite. Would be good to figure out a way to slow down at 500 AU. In order to maximize the time for observation.
  - dyauspitr 2mo ago
    With a Jupiter/solar oberth boost we can at best do around 20 AU per year, so best case scenario it would take atleast 25 years to get there, which honestly isn’t bad at all. For comparison voyager does around 3.6 AU/year.
    - hparadiz 2mo ago
      A series of permanent stations near the vicinity of the oberth burns at Jupiter and the sun could add a lot of Delta V by firing a laser at the probe and the probe could fire one back. Even more so if it was a series of laser boosters strategically placed around the solar system. The numbers start to get really crazy.
  - hparadiz 2mo ago
    It would be most likely a whole solar system. Consider that new horizons only had hours during its flyby to collect all the telemetry that it did. Imagine having 600 pixels of resolution for an exo planet for up to 15 years. Plus all the other telemetry you'll be collecting about the galactic space near us.

Nition 2mo ago

It's just a funny little thing but I love how in a world of "megapixel" and even "gigapixel" space images we have here a "multipixel" imaging of planets, due to achieving a resolution of several pixels. Though the 25km resolution mentioned actually sounds far, far better than the very pixellated planet in the "artist’s depiction". I suppose it depends how small and far away the planet is.