h a l f b a k e r y
"Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
So, planet hunting on this little rock is in it's infancy,but
doing well. But it's one thing to detect a wobble or a
transit effect and quite another to know that there's
something interesting going on in the system you're
looking at. How about making a planet fluorescent? This
done in 2 ways. 1. Simply fire a bunch of super
bright fluorescent material, I suggest quantum dots (I
suggest 3 different frequencies from blue to red in the
ratio of 3:1:4), at a nearby planet, Mars hasn't been pulling
it's weight recently.
or: 2. Find a nice wet planet and fire GM fluorescent
bacteria/algae at it (ratio not so easy here). That would
mean that anyone looking might say to themselves: "ooh,
that looks like another planetary system, couple of gas
giants further out I'd say.... hang on, that's a funny
spectrum moving in up-and-down-in-intensity, what could
create that...." and so on.
Glow in the dark organism
There are many organism that glow in the dark Fungus is one of them. [travbm, Oct 29 2015]
Algae can glow in the dark also. [travbm, Oct 29 2015]
a fungi that glows in the dark. [travbm, Oct 29 2015]
Grow you own glow in the dark plant. [travbm, Oct 29 2015]
||Anyone else out there who are looking for planets have
undoubtedly discovered the same tricks we have;
considering that most (if not all, I'm not sure) of the
planets we've discovered thus far have been detected not
optically but via forces exerted on nearby bodies, it stands
to reason that others probably won't be trying to lay their
naked occular appurati on our little mudball either. Also,
Jupiter is known to shine very brightly in non-visible-to-
humans spectrums already, so all we really need is a great
big blacklight, no?
||Still, bun for glow-inna-dark planet(oid)s. I suggest the
backside of Luna; we know how to get there, we're not
doing anything with it at the moment, and as far as we
know neither is she.
||Addendum: it might be easier, as oft proposed, to just
shine a bunch of really powerful lasers in the direction of
likely neighbors. My only original variation on this
conceptually-overbaked idea would be to trace out a giant
middle finger with the projector, and when the recipients
of the message show up to investigate, we tell them what
it means and interstellar hilarity ensues. Insult comedy
must have universal appeal, or else somebody would have
smacked Don Rickles in his fat mouth three hundred years
||// as far as we know neither is she //
||So you know, monkey boy. It's free parking for our Cube, that's what it is. We doan't neeed no steenking luminous stuff ....
||[Mars hasn't been pulling it's weight recently] [+]
||the thing with lasers, you're average workaday
interstellar class lasers, is that they need power,
and the thing about power, nicely conditioned
laser-grade power, is that it requires civilization.
The thing about civilization, your average
common-or-garden variety laser-making standard
civilization is, that it's around for about 3 blinks of
an eye. Fluorescent planets should outlast the
civilization, and be visible from all directions, in all
planes all the time. Much more cool. We might
want to leave a time capsule on said planet as
well, containing a Cadbury's Flake as a marker of
Earth's creative zenith.
||You've sold me, [bs0u0155]. We're going to paint the Borgs'
parking spot flourescent pink.
||With a Hello Kitty motif.
||Algae and fungus have been know to grow so planting something or having a pool or garden of glowing stuff is all you would have to do.
||Good idea. But I highly recommend using prime numbers
instead of pi. 3:1:4 only encodes 3 digits of pi, and then
only if the aliens also count in base 10. Furthermore,
3+1=4; that's a plausible result of a natural process.
Prime numbers have long been used to encode our
messages to aliens, and we expect the aliens to do the
same, because as far as we know, they can only be
produced by math, not physics or chemistry.
||And in addition to the ratio of intensities, you could
encode information in the ratio of gaps between
wavelengths. That would probably be better, actually,
because it's less susceptible to distortion by gas/dust in
between us and them, and less affected by the spectrum
of whatever's illuminating the phosphors. Tuning
phosphors using chemical compounds is pretty much
impossible with chemical compounds, AFAIK, but I think
it's pretty easy with quantum dots.
||Edit: Disregard my second paragraph if that's what you