Could a passive radar-sighted creature see by space radio emissions?Best place on an humanoid body to develop biological radio?Could a space-dwelling creature survive solely off of sunlight?How can a space “radar” work?How could a radio system (or an alternate) work in an isolated underground society?Is it possible to receive an echo from a radio signal in space?Sci-fi scenario: could all radio communication be blocked?How could a creature get off a planet without technology?If radio communication somehow requires atmosphere to work, how would space exploration be different?Could a large radio telescope survive interstellar spaceflight?Could a gravitational lens in the far future be used to detect 20th century radio or television broadcasts?Could a Superhero with radio wave powers hear the radio?
get unsigned long long addition carry
Capturing the entire webpage with WebExecute's CaptureImage
Is your maximum jump distance halved by grappling?
mini sub panel?
How to animate petals opening
Why does this pattern in powers happen?
Existence of a weight of a representation in the fundamental Weyl chamber
What is the oldest instrument ever?
Why doesn't Dany protect her dragons better?
Is there an idiom that means "revealing a secret unintentionally"?
What are my options legally if NYC company is not paying salary?
Was Mohammed the most popular first name for boys born in Berlin in 2018?
What's the difference between "ricochet" and "bounce"?
Do you take falling damage if falling from 20 feet or less while grappled by someone affected by the Cat's Grace option of the Enhance Ability spell?
How can it be that ssh somename works, while nslookup somename does not?
When was it publicly revealed that a KH-11 spy satellite took pictures of the first Shuttle flight?
My perfect evil overlord plan... or is it?
How to start your Starctaft II games vs AI immediatly?
Company stopped my paying salary. What are my options?
Is it safe to keep the GPU on 100% utilization for a very long time?
logo selection for poster presentation
How do I minimise waste on a flight?
Illegal assignment from Id to List
Identity of a supposed anonymous referee revealed through "Description" of the report
Could a passive radar-sighted creature see by space radio emissions?
Best place on an humanoid body to develop biological radio?Could a space-dwelling creature survive solely off of sunlight?How can a space “radar” work?How could a radio system (or an alternate) work in an isolated underground society?Is it possible to receive an echo from a radio signal in space?Sci-fi scenario: could all radio communication be blocked?How could a creature get off a planet without technology?If radio communication somehow requires atmosphere to work, how would space exploration be different?Could a large radio telescope survive interstellar spaceflight?Could a gravitational lens in the far future be used to detect 20th century radio or television broadcasts?Could a Superhero with radio wave powers hear the radio?
$begingroup$
I am working on a world which is very dark due to an opaque gas layer in the hight atmosphere; but it is opaque mostly in the terahertz range. The creatures in this world therefore rely very little on visible light. Some creatures have evolved sensitivity to radio waves (inspired by a handful of questions here in WB).
This answer to Best place on an humanoid body to develop biological radio? gives an example of a low-power, active radar device for short range that consumes 20 watts of power, which is about 0.86 kcal/hour. This may be prohibitive for smaller creatures (in the 1~5 kg of body mass, I think), so I wonder if passive radar could be used by them.
Could radio emissions from the planet's parent star, and gas giants in the same star system or other radio emission sources be reflected by the environment and perceived by such creatures, akin to how we can see by starlight?
I am not worried about the resolution of this kind of sight. I am more worried about whether radio emissions from space have enough energy to excite my aliens' radio-sensitive organs as much as starlight excites our retinal rods.
science-based xenobiology radio
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am working on a world which is very dark due to an opaque gas layer in the hight atmosphere; but it is opaque mostly in the terahertz range. The creatures in this world therefore rely very little on visible light. Some creatures have evolved sensitivity to radio waves (inspired by a handful of questions here in WB).
This answer to Best place on an humanoid body to develop biological radio? gives an example of a low-power, active radar device for short range that consumes 20 watts of power, which is about 0.86 kcal/hour. This may be prohibitive for smaller creatures (in the 1~5 kg of body mass, I think), so I wonder if passive radar could be used by them.
Could radio emissions from the planet's parent star, and gas giants in the same star system or other radio emission sources be reflected by the environment and perceived by such creatures, akin to how we can see by starlight?
I am not worried about the resolution of this kind of sight. I am more worried about whether radio emissions from space have enough energy to excite my aliens' radio-sensitive organs as much as starlight excites our retinal rods.
science-based xenobiology radio
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I suspect that there would be enough radiation, but that to use it effectively the aliens would need really large eyes, which is why at least with the conditions on earth it has been more efficient to use visible light.
$endgroup$
– trevorKirkby
May 4 at 18:05
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am working on a world which is very dark due to an opaque gas layer in the hight atmosphere; but it is opaque mostly in the terahertz range. The creatures in this world therefore rely very little on visible light. Some creatures have evolved sensitivity to radio waves (inspired by a handful of questions here in WB).
This answer to Best place on an humanoid body to develop biological radio? gives an example of a low-power, active radar device for short range that consumes 20 watts of power, which is about 0.86 kcal/hour. This may be prohibitive for smaller creatures (in the 1~5 kg of body mass, I think), so I wonder if passive radar could be used by them.
Could radio emissions from the planet's parent star, and gas giants in the same star system or other radio emission sources be reflected by the environment and perceived by such creatures, akin to how we can see by starlight?
I am not worried about the resolution of this kind of sight. I am more worried about whether radio emissions from space have enough energy to excite my aliens' radio-sensitive organs as much as starlight excites our retinal rods.
science-based xenobiology radio
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
$endgroup$
I am working on a world which is very dark due to an opaque gas layer in the hight atmosphere; but it is opaque mostly in the terahertz range. The creatures in this world therefore rely very little on visible light. Some creatures have evolved sensitivity to radio waves (inspired by a handful of questions here in WB).
This answer to Best place on an humanoid body to develop biological radio? gives an example of a low-power, active radar device for short range that consumes 20 watts of power, which is about 0.86 kcal/hour. This may be prohibitive for smaller creatures (in the 1~5 kg of body mass, I think), so I wonder if passive radar could be used by them.
Could radio emissions from the planet's parent star, and gas giants in the same star system or other radio emission sources be reflected by the environment and perceived by such creatures, akin to how we can see by starlight?
I am not worried about the resolution of this kind of sight. I am more worried about whether radio emissions from space have enough energy to excite my aliens' radio-sensitive organs as much as starlight excites our retinal rods.
science-based xenobiology radio
science-based xenobiology radio
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
edited May 4 at 15:52
Renan
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
asked May 4 at 14:46
RenanRenan
55.8k15126279
55.8k15126279
1
$begingroup$
I suspect that there would be enough radiation, but that to use it effectively the aliens would need really large eyes, which is why at least with the conditions on earth it has been more efficient to use visible light.
$endgroup$
– trevorKirkby
May 4 at 18:05
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
I suspect that there would be enough radiation, but that to use it effectively the aliens would need really large eyes, which is why at least with the conditions on earth it has been more efficient to use visible light.
$endgroup$
– trevorKirkby
May 4 at 18:05
1
1
$begingroup$
I suspect that there would be enough radiation, but that to use it effectively the aliens would need really large eyes, which is why at least with the conditions on earth it has been more efficient to use visible light.
$endgroup$
– trevorKirkby
May 4 at 18:05
$begingroup$
I suspect that there would be enough radiation, but that to use it effectively the aliens would need really large eyes, which is why at least with the conditions on earth it has been more efficient to use visible light.
$endgroup$
– trevorKirkby
May 4 at 18:05
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I can't speak to the biological aspects, because we really don't have a good sense of how high of fidelity a biological radar can be. Signal quality is everything.
However, I can point to several very important things which suggest its plausibility:
- There are creatures which navigate by sound alone. In fact, you are capable of it... though you don't use the ability much while your eyes are open. Everybody hears the echoes of their shoes and map the world using the echos. Sound isn't the same as radar, but shares a lot of concepts.
- We have technologically derived missiles which use passive radar sensors, such as HARM. So there is at least some prior art for using passive radar sensing as your only sense.
- There is something called Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), which lets one image using radar, the way a human eye or a camera images. So imaging can be done in the radar realm. Of course, SAR requires an active radar, so...
- For my final point, I'd just like to provide a picture. This picture was created using Very Long Baseline Interferomoetry (VLBI). It used passive radio sensors to image an object over 50 million light years away. So there... it can be done, in glorious manner. You all should recognize the image by now:
If they can image that, I think your biological creature stands a chance of imaging something closer!
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just a slight correction: That black hole picture is of the center of Messier 87, which is, according to Wikipedia, 53.5 million light years away. I think you may have left out the word "million" in your answer when giving the distance.
$endgroup$
– Andon
May 4 at 16:55
1
$begingroup$
@Anson. Thanks! Fixed! 50 light years away just isn't quite as impressive.
$endgroup$
– Cort Ammon
May 4 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
It is actually 50 blocks away, and is the sign on the all-night donut place as seen without glasses.
$endgroup$
– Willk
May 4 at 21:19
$begingroup$
@CortAmmon Let's be honest, 50 light years is still impressive
$endgroup$
– Andon
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f146340%2fcould-a-passive-radar-sighted-creature-see-by-space-radio-emissions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I can't speak to the biological aspects, because we really don't have a good sense of how high of fidelity a biological radar can be. Signal quality is everything.
However, I can point to several very important things which suggest its plausibility:
- There are creatures which navigate by sound alone. In fact, you are capable of it... though you don't use the ability much while your eyes are open. Everybody hears the echoes of their shoes and map the world using the echos. Sound isn't the same as radar, but shares a lot of concepts.
- We have technologically derived missiles which use passive radar sensors, such as HARM. So there is at least some prior art for using passive radar sensing as your only sense.
- There is something called Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), which lets one image using radar, the way a human eye or a camera images. So imaging can be done in the radar realm. Of course, SAR requires an active radar, so...
- For my final point, I'd just like to provide a picture. This picture was created using Very Long Baseline Interferomoetry (VLBI). It used passive radio sensors to image an object over 50 million light years away. So there... it can be done, in glorious manner. You all should recognize the image by now:
If they can image that, I think your biological creature stands a chance of imaging something closer!
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just a slight correction: That black hole picture is of the center of Messier 87, which is, according to Wikipedia, 53.5 million light years away. I think you may have left out the word "million" in your answer when giving the distance.
$endgroup$
– Andon
May 4 at 16:55
1
$begingroup$
@Anson. Thanks! Fixed! 50 light years away just isn't quite as impressive.
$endgroup$
– Cort Ammon
May 4 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
It is actually 50 blocks away, and is the sign on the all-night donut place as seen without glasses.
$endgroup$
– Willk
May 4 at 21:19
$begingroup$
@CortAmmon Let's be honest, 50 light years is still impressive
$endgroup$
– Andon
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I can't speak to the biological aspects, because we really don't have a good sense of how high of fidelity a biological radar can be. Signal quality is everything.
However, I can point to several very important things which suggest its plausibility:
- There are creatures which navigate by sound alone. In fact, you are capable of it... though you don't use the ability much while your eyes are open. Everybody hears the echoes of their shoes and map the world using the echos. Sound isn't the same as radar, but shares a lot of concepts.
- We have technologically derived missiles which use passive radar sensors, such as HARM. So there is at least some prior art for using passive radar sensing as your only sense.
- There is something called Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), which lets one image using radar, the way a human eye or a camera images. So imaging can be done in the radar realm. Of course, SAR requires an active radar, so...
- For my final point, I'd just like to provide a picture. This picture was created using Very Long Baseline Interferomoetry (VLBI). It used passive radio sensors to image an object over 50 million light years away. So there... it can be done, in glorious manner. You all should recognize the image by now:
If they can image that, I think your biological creature stands a chance of imaging something closer!
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just a slight correction: That black hole picture is of the center of Messier 87, which is, according to Wikipedia, 53.5 million light years away. I think you may have left out the word "million" in your answer when giving the distance.
$endgroup$
– Andon
May 4 at 16:55
1
$begingroup$
@Anson. Thanks! Fixed! 50 light years away just isn't quite as impressive.
$endgroup$
– Cort Ammon
May 4 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
It is actually 50 blocks away, and is the sign on the all-night donut place as seen without glasses.
$endgroup$
– Willk
May 4 at 21:19
$begingroup$
@CortAmmon Let's be honest, 50 light years is still impressive
$endgroup$
– Andon
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I can't speak to the biological aspects, because we really don't have a good sense of how high of fidelity a biological radar can be. Signal quality is everything.
However, I can point to several very important things which suggest its plausibility:
- There are creatures which navigate by sound alone. In fact, you are capable of it... though you don't use the ability much while your eyes are open. Everybody hears the echoes of their shoes and map the world using the echos. Sound isn't the same as radar, but shares a lot of concepts.
- We have technologically derived missiles which use passive radar sensors, such as HARM. So there is at least some prior art for using passive radar sensing as your only sense.
- There is something called Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), which lets one image using radar, the way a human eye or a camera images. So imaging can be done in the radar realm. Of course, SAR requires an active radar, so...
- For my final point, I'd just like to provide a picture. This picture was created using Very Long Baseline Interferomoetry (VLBI). It used passive radio sensors to image an object over 50 million light years away. So there... it can be done, in glorious manner. You all should recognize the image by now:
If they can image that, I think your biological creature stands a chance of imaging something closer!
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
$endgroup$
I can't speak to the biological aspects, because we really don't have a good sense of how high of fidelity a biological radar can be. Signal quality is everything.
However, I can point to several very important things which suggest its plausibility:
- There are creatures which navigate by sound alone. In fact, you are capable of it... though you don't use the ability much while your eyes are open. Everybody hears the echoes of their shoes and map the world using the echos. Sound isn't the same as radar, but shares a lot of concepts.
- We have technologically derived missiles which use passive radar sensors, such as HARM. So there is at least some prior art for using passive radar sensing as your only sense.
- There is something called Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), which lets one image using radar, the way a human eye or a camera images. So imaging can be done in the radar realm. Of course, SAR requires an active radar, so...
- For my final point, I'd just like to provide a picture. This picture was created using Very Long Baseline Interferomoetry (VLBI). It used passive radio sensors to image an object over 50 million light years away. So there... it can be done, in glorious manner. You all should recognize the image by now:
If they can image that, I think your biological creature stands a chance of imaging something closer!
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
edited May 4 at 18:57
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
answered May 4 at 16:08
Cort AmmonCort Ammon
112k18198396
112k18198396
1
$begingroup$
Just a slight correction: That black hole picture is of the center of Messier 87, which is, according to Wikipedia, 53.5 million light years away. I think you may have left out the word "million" in your answer when giving the distance.
$endgroup$
– Andon
May 4 at 16:55
1
$begingroup$
@Anson. Thanks! Fixed! 50 light years away just isn't quite as impressive.
$endgroup$
– Cort Ammon
May 4 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
It is actually 50 blocks away, and is the sign on the all-night donut place as seen without glasses.
$endgroup$
– Willk
May 4 at 21:19
$begingroup$
@CortAmmon Let's be honest, 50 light years is still impressive
$endgroup$
– Andon
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Just a slight correction: That black hole picture is of the center of Messier 87, which is, according to Wikipedia, 53.5 million light years away. I think you may have left out the word "million" in your answer when giving the distance.
$endgroup$
– Andon
May 4 at 16:55
1
$begingroup$
@Anson. Thanks! Fixed! 50 light years away just isn't quite as impressive.
$endgroup$
– Cort Ammon
May 4 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
It is actually 50 blocks away, and is the sign on the all-night donut place as seen without glasses.
$endgroup$
– Willk
May 4 at 21:19
$begingroup$
@CortAmmon Let's be honest, 50 light years is still impressive
$endgroup$
– Andon
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Just a slight correction: That black hole picture is of the center of Messier 87, which is, according to Wikipedia, 53.5 million light years away. I think you may have left out the word "million" in your answer when giving the distance.
$endgroup$
– Andon
May 4 at 16:55
$begingroup$
Just a slight correction: That black hole picture is of the center of Messier 87, which is, according to Wikipedia, 53.5 million light years away. I think you may have left out the word "million" in your answer when giving the distance.
$endgroup$
– Andon
May 4 at 16:55
1
1
$begingroup$
@Anson. Thanks! Fixed! 50 light years away just isn't quite as impressive.
$endgroup$
– Cort Ammon
May 4 at 18:58
$begingroup$
@Anson. Thanks! Fixed! 50 light years away just isn't quite as impressive.
$endgroup$
– Cort Ammon
May 4 at 18:58
1
1
$begingroup$
It is actually 50 blocks away, and is the sign on the all-night donut place as seen without glasses.
$endgroup$
– Willk
May 4 at 21:19
$begingroup$
It is actually 50 blocks away, and is the sign on the all-night donut place as seen without glasses.
$endgroup$
– Willk
May 4 at 21:19
$begingroup$
@CortAmmon Let's be honest, 50 light years is still impressive
$endgroup$
– Andon
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@CortAmmon Let's be honest, 50 light years is still impressive
$endgroup$
– Andon
2 days ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f146340%2fcould-a-passive-radar-sighted-creature-see-by-space-radio-emissions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
I suspect that there would be enough radiation, but that to use it effectively the aliens would need really large eyes, which is why at least with the conditions on earth it has been more efficient to use visible light.
$endgroup$
– trevorKirkby
May 4 at 18:05