this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
67 points (100.0% liked)
Space
7294 readers
2 users here now
News and findings about our cosmos.
Subcommunity of Science
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The title here is a little misleading. A signal that repeated once per hour, as in 60 minutes, would be pretty astounding, and might be a good way for a civilization with enough information about us to say 'hi' in a way we'd recognize. It would certainly be very strange to see a natural phenomenon ticking away the hours at a precise rate.
53.8 minutes, on the other hand, is a bit less attention grabbing.
I'd argue that a more precise timing like 53.8 minutes is more attention grabbing. It shows finer grained control of technology; a "look here! we can do this too!" sort of demonstration.
If we are the "more advanced" neighbor; then I could see that being done.
It's more that their knowing what an hour is would be impressive. Our selection of the hour as a measure of time is arbitrary outside of its specific context. It's just 1/24th of our planet's rotational period. We could just as easily split the day up into 10ths or 15ths or 7ths or whatever.
To broadcast a signal that's exactly an hour long to a planet that uses the hour as a measure of time might potentially imply someone trying to reference our way of measuring time. A signal that repeats every 53.8 minutes is on a timer that isn't specifically relevant to Earth in the same way an hour exactly would be.
That signal might be insignificant to us; but it may be their way of establishing a timescale.
The time may be derived from how long their planet takes to rotate...aka the length of one sub-unit of their day.
Or, it could be the periodicity of the lifecycle of a cool bug they like, or it could be just a random period from any huge number of celestial objects we have yet to categorize. I have a guess for which of these options it is, personally.
Such a cycle is a cycle like any other. It's not "more precise" when it's shorter.
We attribute the 53.8 according to our scale.