|
Optical SETI Observations during the Day - DiscussionRadobs 04The following text, and the separate theory document is an edited version of about half a dozen recent messages to Bob Dixon: I have suggested that the Perkins Observatory might be used for Optical SETI. Certainly it would be a unique location for both Microwave and Optical SETI activities. Because Optical SETI will use very narrow band incoherent (Scanning Fabry-Perot Spectrum Analyzer) or coherent (heterodyning) receivers, light pollution should not be a problem. Indeed, my calculations indicate that we might be able to operate in daylight without signal degradation from a clear blue sky! Of course, there is the question of whether we should first use an infrared telescope for the "magic" Carbon Dioxide wavelength of 10,600 nm. One doesn't normally consider the possibility of doing optical astronomy during daylight hours, but the narrow optical bandpass demanded by Optical SETI appears to make this possible. If I have done my calculations correctly, it would appear that for a 10 meter diameter diffraction limited telescope pointing at 45 degrees to the zenith under a broad daylight clear blue sky, sky noise does not degrade SNR until the optical bandwidth at 656 nm becomes greater than about 10 MHz. Surprisingly, for CO2 at 10,600 nm, the SNR begins to degrade when the optical bandwidth is greater than about 400 Hz. Note that with a bandwidth of 10 MHz, substantial degradation in SNR will occur for small and non-adaptive ground-based telescopes that cannot resolve nearby alien stars from their planets at visible wavelengths. This is due to Planckian radiation, and is on top of any signal degradation due to scattered daylight. I note that Bernard Oliver, near the bottom of the left hand column on page 51 of the 1973 revise edition of the Cyclops Report, also indicates that his modeled optical and infrared systems could be used in daylight, and that even his 3 MHz photon-counting system (optical system B) was hardly affected by daylight. Note that my calculations are based on a situation where the diameter of the active region of each photodetector in the array corresponds to the diffraction limited spot or pixel size. In other words, the amount of skylight detected by each pixel in the focal image plane is many orders of magnitude less than the total skylight power in the image plane. Except for scatter within the telescope, each pixel sees photons from a very small part of the sky - an area approximately corresponding to that occupied by the image of a star. If 1 million pixels and photodetectors cover the field of view, then there is approximately a 10^6 factor in total detected skylight at the telescope. It we have twice the aperture diameter (all other things being equal) we will have four times the collected light, but we will also have four times as many pixels, so the background per pixel remains constant. Thus, there is hope that with a collection of high-Q electronically-tunable Fabry-Perot interferometer bandpass filters and a photon-counting array, we could do some real "poor-man's" Optical SETI even in daylight. This would probably be a lot easier than optical heterodyne detection, especially as we will want to tune over a large part of the spectrum. I expect that we would try to ramp the Fabry-Perot (spectrum analyzer) to compensate as much as possible for our local Doppler chirp (drift). We would also need to use a photon-counting photodetector array, if we are to be efficient in our search strategy. Note that it would be advisable to specify special telescope optics that not only function throughout the visible and near-infrared but also at 10.6 microns. Whatever one wants to say about daytime Optical SETI, we clearly need not be concerned about night time Optical SETI in clear visibility conditions. I don't even believe (this needs to be checked) that the strong spectral lines produced by gas discharge lighting scattered from the sky will be a problem, because these lines are relatively wideband, and there should be insignificant energy in a 10 MHz optical bandwidth. Interestingly, Optical SETI may be less affected by man-made artificial sources of light that Microwave SETI is by man-made artificial sources of R.F.! Think about that! This comes about because the optical regime is much noisier by nature than the microwave regime, so we have to try much harder to really muck things up. We can't do much about the number of cloudy days in Columbus. It's a pity that OSU doesn't operate a telescope in Hawaii - that's my favorite part of the world! Of course, we can't put a 10 meter diameter telescope in the Perkins Observatory. However, since my Optical SETI rationale also includes the view that Optical ETI transmissions will be quite strong, we can still hope to detect signals with a substantially smaller diameter. Remember, I estimated a CNR of 34 dB re 1 Hz for a 10 meter symmetrical visible system over 10 light years, with only 1 kW of transmitted power. If nearby aliens are putting out megawatts of gigawatts, we have some margin on receiving mirror size. To minimize transmitter chirp without actually dechirping their optical oscillator, the best place to put a transmitter is in orbit about a star. There is the danger for the transmitting race of accidentally passing through the transmitted beam in regions of space relatively close to the transmitter, since the near-field would stretch out quite a distance. This would be like an SDI "death ray", instantly vaporizing anyone or anything straying into its path! This is probably another good reason for putting it into its own orbit about the alien star, well away from inhabited planets or space colonies, and where it could be directly pumped by stellar radiation. I personally think that a space-based Optical SETI program may be ideally suited for an activity associated with Space Station Freedom (whose advisability is presently being seriously questioned). NASA is always looking for additional ways to justify the cost of the space-station. It could be that the reliability issue which has loomed in importance recently as far as the repair and maintenance of the space station is concerned, would also be important as far as maintaining a variety of local-oscillator lasers in the Optical SETI Space Telescope. Thus, having people around to fix the lasers if they should need repair, or even replace consumables (such as laser dyes), is an ideal match for a space-station activity. Of course, an Optical SETI Space Telescope in low earth orbit is not the best place for producing a low level of local Doppler chirp. If it is indeed true that we can do Optical SETI in daylight without significant degradation in SNR caused by scatter within the telescope, then we could establish Optical SETI activities at all the present major and soon to see first light large optical telescopes, without interfering with conventional astronomy. Simply put, Optical SETI would be done during daylight hours, and conventional astronomy during the night, allowing 24 hour utilization of optical telescopes. The implication of this realization is profound. There would be no good grounds for not instrumenting the world's biggest telescopes for the optical search. This time sharing (multiplexing) of optical telescopes should be received quite well by conventional astronomers, and would mean that Optical SETI could be done at minimal cost since we wouldn't need a dedicated large aperture telescope or telescopes. A symbiotic relationship could grow between conventional optical astronomy and Optical SETI. If this can be done on an adaptive telescope with deformable mirrors, so much the better. I'd like to propose an Optical SETI activity for the Perkins or Columbus Telescopes. This could give a tremendous boost and attention to OSU's SETI activities. Up to now, hyperfine spectral resolution in the visible region has not been of interest to optical astronomers because of the severe lack of sensitivity at such high resolution levels - there are so few photons arriving here per second from distant narrow-linewidth natural phenomena. This probably explains the lack of development of optical heterodyne technology in conventional astronomy for the visible part of the spectrum. I'd like to propose a fanciful idea - that the aliens know that Interstellar Optical Communications, at least the reception part, can be done during daylight hours within an atmosphere. They also know that it can be done by time-sharing great ground-based optical telescopes with conventional astronomy. That this knowledge is just another reason why beamed (directed or targeted) Interstellar Optical Communications to emerging technical civilizations would be preferred over its microwave counterpart. You must admit Bob, that whatever you or Bernard Oliver might say about my technical approach, I certainly have an imagination - perhaps I should take up writing science fiction! Now the angular resolution of a 10 meter diameter telescope outside the atmosphere is about 0.014 arcseconds, while the performance inside the atmosphere is more like 0.5 to 1 arcseconds. The ratio of focal plane areas formed by these spots is about (1/0.014)^2. This is equivalent to 37 dB. This is the factor by which the Planckian energy density in the focal plane is reduced because the light is smeared over a greater area. The margin between the Planckian starlight level and daylight background is about (72 - 32) dB, i.e., 40 dB. The smearing of the image within the atmosphere would appear to account for most of the difference in energy densities. Thus, it would appear that the fact that we cannot see 2nd magnitude stars in broad daylight, may be largely due to the smearing of stellar images by the atmosphere. Clearly, if we are going to use existing large ground-based telescopes, it is highly desirable to include a deformable mirror system to clean up the image before reaching the focal plane of the SETI receiver imaging array. December 16, 1990 RADOBS.04 BBOARD No. 268 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dr. Stuart A. Kingsley Copyright (c), 1990 * * AMIEE, SMIEEE * * Consultant "Where No Photon Has Gone Before" * * __________ * * FIBERDYNE OPTOELECTRONICS / \ * * 545 Northview Drive --- hf >> kT --- * * Columbus, Ohio 43209 \__________/ * * United States .. .. .. .. .. * * Tel. (614) 258-7402 . . . . . . . . . . . * * skingsle@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu .. .. .. .. .. * * CompuServe: 72376,3545 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|