Persistence of Technosignatures: A Comment on Lingam and Loeb
Milan M. \'Cirkovi\'c, Branislav Vukoti\'c, Milan Stojanovi\'c
TL;DR
This paper discusses extending and refining Lingam and Loeb's heuristic for technosignature searches, emphasizing durability and supporting Dysonian SETI concepts.
Contribution
It proposes two extensions to Lingam and Loeb's heuristic, focusing on technosignature durability and implications for Dysonian SETI.
Findings
Heuristic extensions improve technosignature search strategies.
Durability considerations strengthen Dysonian SETI arguments.
Supports broader search frameworks for extraterrestrial intelligence.
Abstract
In a recent paper in this journal, Lingam and Loeb (2018) develop an excellent heuristic for searches for biosignatures vs. technosignatures. We consider two ways in which their approach could be extended and sharpened, with focus on durability of technosignatures. We also note an important consequence of the adopted heuristic which offers strong support to the ideas of the Dysonian SETI.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.