A parody of the evolution of various acronyms concerning the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence

The much-missed Douglas Adams might have started this blog with the following Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy definitions for SETI:

Seti – a Pharoah who ruled Egypt between 1290 to 1279 BC and suffered the indignity of his mummy being beheaded. 

Settee – a long comfortable seat with a back and arms, which two or more people can sit on (Sofa to our American friends).

SETI – an acronym for the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence

CETI

It is the latter we are concerned with here. In the early days of framing the question about whether we are alone in the universe as a sentient, intelligent species, efforts to examine that question were invariably framed as Communication with Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence and used the acronym CETI. Readers will find a number of books and publications from the 1960’s and ‘70’s to demonstrate this, most famously, ‘Communication with Extraterrestrial Intelligence, edited by Carl Sagan’, a record of the first international conference on the subject, held in September 1971 in Soviet Armenia, and also in a 1965 technical paper presented by Lambros Callimahos, a celebrated codebreaker in the USA’s National Security Agency (NSA).   

The problem is that the term arguably suggested the matter was a problem of defining the best technical method(s) of conducting electromagnetic intercourse with an ETI that could be many, many light years distant (if they existed at all), subject to the unfortunate problematic effects of adhering to a universal speed limit of communications to 186,000 miles per second (the speed of light).

Assumptions

With hindsight, it was a wildly optimistic acronym. Because the first and not insignificant problem was surely to actually detect signs of an ETI before worrying about how to communicate with them (or whether that would even be possible). Did it suggest a certain hubris on the part of the early SETI pioneers? When Drake et al realised that radio-telescopes were capable of detecting powerful signals over interstellar distances, certain assumptions were made: 

  • that ETI would be more technologically advanced than us (since a signal that had travelled tens or hundreds of light years would have given the Extra-terrestrials a technical capability before us)
  • that the advanced ETI would want to blast powerful, decipherable signals towards Earth, containing substantial information from either the Encyclopaedia Galactica, or it least their society’s knowledge and presumed technical prowess
  • because they would be technically more advanced than us and hadn’t blown themselves to smithereens in a nuclear holocaust when they sent their message, they would be morally more advanced and impart benign philosophical wisdom to help save us from ourselves
  • that this form of discourse would be required because ETI would not be able to travel between the stars and hence there would be no security risk to the process either

SETI or STETI?

Good old ETI. But after listening (admittedly in fits and starts) for the best part of two decades without the discovery of a deliberate Extra-terrestrial beacon, CETI was oh so quietly replaced with the more modest term SETI; Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence. [John Billingham, the leading figure in NASA’s SETI deliberations suggested the updated acronym was proposed by John Wolfe at a Science Workshop in December 1975 – SETI Pioneers, David Swift, University of Arizona Press, 1990]

But how accurate is this widely used acronym? After all, there may be alien creatures on distant worlds that could be defined as possessing intelligence; on Earth there are a number of such creatures including dolphins, octopi and whales. But if their extra-terrestrial equivalents are not capable of using technology that we can detect with ours, we’re not going to find them in current SETI searches. Hence, what is currently being searched for is manifestations of the technology of an ETI.

Perhaps STETI, the Search for Technology of Extra-terrestrial Intelligence would be a more accurate term?

And whilst the hope of detecting a deliberate message beamed just at us has not completely dissipated, most pundits agree that the search for evidence of ETI has to be widened through a number of different strategies, and that detecting accidental leakage of ETI activities is just as plausible an outcome as the former.

METTI and METI

Arguably, Manifestations of Extra-Terrestrial Technological Intelligence (METTI) might be a useful terminology, since this also describes scenarios where we detect signs of technology that were not constructed to draw our attention; engineering projects such as Dyson spheres (a construction to trap and utilise all the energy output of the ETI’s parent star), and signals between ETI space probes, whether ship-to-shore or ship-to-ship etc. Though the acronym SMETTI (Search for Manifestations of Extra-Terrestrial Technological Intelligence) would sound alarmingly like a villainous organisation in a James Bond movie.

But the acronym METI has been nabbed by a growing voice in SETI, and stands for Messaging Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence, e.g., beaming powerful signals bearing information about Earthlings into outer space. A number of these attempts have been made, the most famous being the 1974 Arecibo message. This approach remains highly controversial.

Supporters of the strategy claim we have already been leaking Electromagnetic signals since the earliest invention of radio, and subsequent TV and radar signals, and hence have already ‘betrayed’ our presence. However, the strength and nature of such electromagnetic leakage would require enormous receiving power on the part of ETI, and likely not be detectable at a distance of more than 10-15 lights years. Unlike the Arecibo message, which remains the most powerful signal ever broadcast from this planet and would be detectable at potentially hundreds of light years. It is not a reasonable analogy for METI proponents to make.

Extra-terrestrial Artificial Intelligence

So, back to STETI. One more consideration: how likely is it that any manifestations of ETI we might detect will emanate from ETI’s Artificial Intelligence (AI)? Indeed, an ETI’s AI emissaries might well outlive their creators. Are we searching for ETAI, Extra-Terrestrial Artificial Intelligence?

The above observations are not a serious suggestion to change the title of the search activities, but a reminder that SETI practitioners, pundits and enthusiasts alike, should pause to consider what the terminology they frequently use really means, and the inherent implied assumptions those terms carry.

Perhaps the subject deserves more precision in its definitions? 

Are you a Xenologist?

Which leads me to a final thought: How do you describe your own interest in the SETI issue? In correspondence, or on social media platforms, I have often described myself as ‘a SETI enthusiast’. And that is true to an extent. But it doesn’t necessarily reflect or encompass my wider interest in the notion of extra-terrestrial life and intelligence; rather it is a term for an evolving scientific exploration based upon notions devised by radio-astronomers and astrophysicists in the early 1960s. It doesn’t quite encompass the cultural and philosophical milieu and musings that considering all aspects of interest in such a wide subject might include, such as science fiction (a rich source of musings about the potential nature of alien life). In short, it is somewhat limiting.

Science fiction writer Robert A. Heinlein is credited with introducing the noun ‘xenology’ in 1954; now defined as ‘the study of life forms and cultures beyond Earth, (mainly in science fiction) and derived using the prefix xeno-, from the Greek xenos “alien” – hence, the study of aliens. Fans of the Sci-Fi horror movie franchise Alien (and that would include me) are now very familiar with the term Xenomorph, as the descriptor of the unpleasant life-cycle of the hideous alien menace encountered [the curious will find a Facebook page dedicated to these fictional creatures, called Xenomorph Fanspage – be warned that some of the content is explicitly irreverent!]

Despite its Science Fiction heritage, Xenology was used as the title of a 1979 non-fiction book by writer Robert Freitas, and I would heartily recommend reading the online version available – Freitas has many interesting perspectives on Contact with Extra-terrestrials.

So, henceforth, I think I might start describing myself as a student of Xenology, despite the inevitable explanations it might require!

John Keeling is a Content creator for EAAROCIBO‘s social media presence; a planned UK SETI project by the charitable educational organisation East Anglian Astrophysical Research Organisation.

His related book, LANDED! The Great British Flying Saucer Hoax & Other Extraterrestrial Spoofs is scheduled for publication September, 2024.