34. Chirp (1/13/2002 to 1/15/2002) 
One method used to distinguish signals that originate off the earth is to
make use of the Doppler shift caused by the rotation of the
earth. This is how that works.
Think of the earth in its real position with the north pole pointed to your
actual north. Throw away your lifelong idea that the North pole is
up (its not - never has been). As I look out my window with a due east
view I think of the north pole to my left and the earth turning toward the
east.
If you suddenly feel a sense of nausea when your brain kicks into this idea
you are experiencing a paradigm shift (without a clutch). A second
paradigm shift occurs when you think of the orientation of the solar
system.
Now think of an ET signal coming in from a star that is on the eastern
horizon. Since the earth is turning toward that signal it will be
Doppler shifted up in frequency. If we train our antenna on that star
and track it during the day (remember this search runs fine during the day)
the star will rise until right overhead. The Doppler shift will then be
at a minimum. If we keep tracking the star toward the west the shift
will become more and more negative until the star sets in the
west.
On our waterfall display this would result in sort of a 'S"
line. Using this as a detection method means that all 'S' curved signals
have a good chance of being from some where other than earth.
I could write software to search for these 'S' signals but doing so would
be a difficult task. A better solution is to move the receiver frequency
in step with the Doppler. Up in frequency when pointed East, Down when
pointed West. The resulting 'chirp' of the received signal causes it to
become a 'I' rather than a 'S' and is much easer to write software for.
All local signals then move like 'S' and can be ignored.
The calculation for the chirp frequency is:
| This is a section of Delphi code that
calculates the needed chirp of the receiver. This same calculation
can be found in the SETI
League's web site in Excel format. All SETI Net software is
available at SOFTWARE. |
(* C h i
r p T i m e r E v e n t *)
procedure TfrmWiNRADiO.timerChirpTimer(Sender: TObject);
var
dfdt: Real; // Change in receiver frequency each
minute.
HzPerSec: Real; // Change per second
Fd: Real; // Doppler shift due to the earth's
rotation
begin
Fd := Fo * K * Cos(DegToRad(SETINetLat)) * cos(DegToRad(DEC))
* Sin(DegToRad(HA));
dfdt := Fo * K * Cos(DegToRad(SETINetLat)) * cos(DegToRad(DEC)) *
Sin(DegToRad(HA + 0.12535))
- (Fo * K *
Cos(DegToRad(SETINetLat)) * cos(DegToRad(DEC)) * Sin(DegToRad(HA -
0.12535)));
HzPerSec := dfdt / 60;
NextFo := NextFo + HzPerSec;
if (Trunc(NextFo) <> Fo) then
begin
Fo := Trunc(NextFo);
SetRadioFreq(Trunc(Fo));
end;
end; |
This code runs every second during tracking operations. When
the Next Frequency (NextFo) becomes larger than the current frequency
the receiver is changed to the new frequency.
In practice the NextFo is +0.13 Hz/sec when pointed due East and
-0.13Hz/sec pointed due West. When pointed either North or South the
Doppler is zero.
Comments: E-Mail me at Comments@SETI.Net
33. Selection of Integration Method (1/15/2002 to 3/1/2002)
Integration of the incoming signal is one of the techniques to bring a very
small signal up out of the noise. When I run the Scanner portion of the
software I get a lot of noise along with the signal I'm looking for.
This picture shows a 20 KHz section of the waterhole with a signal in bin 180
to 190. The signal is the Weak Signal
Source running at 1420.395189 that I use as a test beacon.
This display has a lot of noise on it and the resulting waterfall does not
show a crisp line where the beacon is running. This is not right.
Waterfall with Weak Signal Source
The WSS line is very difficult to see because of the lossy JPG image you
get over the internet but in person you can see the line but, even in person,
its not good enough. Integration of the signal should help.
The integration problem makes you think about the kind of signal your
looking for. For example I think the signal will be a narrow band beacon
with on/off modulation (see Epiphany Of The Day - below). Since
integration tends to highlight signals that are on all the time and hide
signals that are closer to noise the length of time that I integrate must be
carefully selected. A signal that drifted from one bin to another in the
FFT would be lost in the noise. A signal that was keyed on/off in a
regular pattern would also be lost in the noise.
To make these signal loss factors as small as possible the system changes
the receiver frequency to exactly counteract the Doppler caused by the earths
rotation (see POD #34 Chirp) - this keeps any signal in
as small a number of bins as possible and the integration time is kept short
enough so that an on/off signal will still show up.
The following describes the basic search philosophy slowly coming to the
front as I design various parts of the system.
Epiphany
Of The Day
|
|
After
looking at the software and hardware requirements for my Project Argus
station, and mulling over such technical questions as
integration time constant and Doppler shift correction, I have come to
the following epiphany:
I
must look for the most obvious signal - and that is the signal that I
would choose to send myself, if I had the money to do so. What that
means (and it seems obvious once put on paper) is that:
I must look for myself
Any
ETI that I might hope to detect must be more like myself than unlike
me, in most basic ways. Not to put too fine a point on it, but,
for example, I think this ET would think in the same time frame as we
do. Not at the speed of a glacier or at the speed of bullet, but
somewhere near our 'thinking speed'. This is necessary to make the
signal recognizable to us when finally detected.
ET's
physical makeup would have to be about the same as ours. Not as
small as a bacterium or as large as one of the rolling hills I can see
from my window, but somewhere in-between. This would give him
the same type of control over his environment, and the same capability
as I have to construct the needed transmitter, which could produce a
signal which I can recognize. Not all ETI need be like me; only those
who I have a realistic chance of detecting.
ETI's
transmitter must be an RF signal generator. Some other, more
exotic form of communication may well be in use, but since I can't
construct a receiver to detect exotica, it's not worth
considering. This leaves open optical SETI - but not for me. I
know nothing about the optics required on that scale. As a
microwaver, I'll stick to the area where I have a shot at SETI
success.
The
signal must be a deliberate beacon. That's the only type I and
most other Argus stations would have a ghost of a chance of
hearing. Leakage detection seems less likely, if only because of
the transmit power requirements needed to show up on my system.
Detecting planetary Radar also seems unlikely, because it seems that
it would only be sent for short periods. Once a radar echo was
recovered, the transmitter would most likely be turned off or pointed
somewhere else. The modulation scheme needed for an effective
Planetary Radar might also make it difficult to recognize on this end.
I
would set my beacon up in the waterhole to maximize its chances of
discovery. I would want to be heard, and that is the most
obvious place to start. The hydrogen line is at 1420 MHz and the
hydroxyl line at 1662 MHZ. I would transmit at exactly 1/2 way
between the two at 1541 MHz. (One could also make a case for the
geometric mean of the hydrogen and hydroxyl lines, which is 1536
MHz. But we're splitting hairs here.) I would expect ETI
to similarly transmit somewhere near the middle of the waterhole, if
he wants me to detect him. Unfortunately, my Project Argus
system (receiver and filter) can't tune this frequency, but if I were
to make changes to my system, that is where I would choose to
monitor.
An
ideal interstellar beacon should be narrow band to concentrate the
transmit power, and to make it distinguishable from natural
sources. It must be directed at our star. This is
necessary to conserve power, and to make possible reception over huge
distances. So a directed beacon is what I am looking for.
I can see ETI pointing such a beacon at each candidate star, one at a
time, sending the beacon for some length of time, and then moving to
the next star.
The
above targeted beacon strategy implies that earth rotation Doppler
compensation is a minimum requirement of our Project Argus receiving
stations, if only to exclude local signals. Correcting for the Doppler
shift due to our travel around the sun is also a requirement. I
have the earth rotation Doppler chirp running now - the other
compensation is an unknown quantity to me at this point, but something
which Project Argus participants should be working on.
My
hypothetical interstellar beacon would be locked onto each star for
about a year at a time. We may have missed ETI's signal already,
and may have to wait another 300 Billion years for it to show up
again. Or, it may be starting tomorrow. Since we just
don't know, we may as well assume that it starts tomorrow.
If
I were sending a beacon, its transmitter frequency would be
Doppler-adjusted to the Galactic center of rest. Since the
purpose of a beacon is to be seen against a background of other
signals, this would make it clear to anyone receiving it that it was
an intentional signal. Again, I have no idea how to design this
correction into my receiver chirp. If it's small (less than
about 0.01 Hz/sec), no matter where I point my antenna I can't use it
anyway, because my 10Hz/Bin resolution and planned 30-minute
integration time constant make such small Doppler rates moot. If
the compensation for the Galactic center of rest is a sizeable
fraction of a Hz per second, I'd better figure out how to implement
it!
My
beacon would be a CW signal on/off modulated in a regular
way. I might send morse code in a repetitive pattern, and
I would send it at a speed slow enough to allow integration of each
character, but not so slow as to allow the signal to drift across many
bins during a given key-down period.
If
I concentrate on looking for myself, I may well miss signals sent by
those not like me. But I know that creatures who think like me
exist (if only by Earth's own example.) Designing our search
around those not like us involves pure speculation, and may reduce our
chances for SETI success. |
I got a good example of what over integration can do today. I have a
small oscillator that I use as a test beacon (the SETI League Weak Signal
Source) and it runs day and night so that it will be as stable as
possible. Today it started drifting. In a 30 minute run its
waterfall line moved about 10 bins, that's about 100 HZ, up band. At the
end of the integration period it simply disappeared - averaged right out of
the picture.
I hope it wasn't my receiver moving down band because I don't have much of
a hope if it was. If it was the WSS I can work on stabilizing its
frequency a bit.
The point is that if you integrate past the capabilities of you equipment
you may loose your signal not gain it.
Comments: E-Mail me at Comments@SETI.Net
Thought Sea Change
#2.
Since I think of the earth north pole actually pointing north the old image
of the solar system must likewise be revised.
Solar system as I think of it.
Now that small blue marble, the earth, is in its proper place with the
planets wheeling overhead and under it as it loops over and under the sun.

Our Galaxy - The Milky Way. About 300,000,000 stars and (my guess)
about the same number of habitual planets.
The core idea of the SETI Search:
With 100 million or more habitual planets there must be many that are
already communicating with each other and would like company. We live in
one of the outer arms of the galaxy in a rather out of the way spot but would
welcome company as well.