I thought that the discussion of the terrestrial microwave window in the interview with Dr. Tarter was especially interesting. With so much noise in the universe, it’s fascinating that there is a region of frequencies that is quiet enough for researchers to focus in on rather than manually selecting frequencies.
One question I’d ask regarding this window is how it factors in to the idea of “unknown unknowns”- Knowing that there is a subset of frequencies that most likely cannot be created by nature must make observation and research simpler since focusing on a specific region limits the introduction of more randomness and uncertainty into the equation, but is the ease provided by a convenient subset worth potentially missing out on potential signs occurring on unobserved frequencies?
https://www.labxchange.org/library/items/lb:HarvardX:68789c56:lx_simulation:1
Dr. Tarter's discussion on the terrestrial microwave window during the interview was particularly engaging to me too. It's intriguing how amidst the vast expanse of cosmic noise, this specific frequency range offers researchers a tranquil haven for focused exploration. Your question regarding its implications for "unknown unknowns" is insightful. While confining observations to this subset may streamline research by reducing randomness, there remains a valid concern about overlooking signals beyond this spectrum. It underscores the delicate equilibrium between simplification and the possibility of missing out on unforeseen discoveries.
The concept of examining a quieter frequency range seems like a practical solution to cut through cosmic noise. However, I also feel like this assumption might exclude important datasets. For instance, what if the key to picking up non-natural frequencies is how they interact with the dust particles between us and the source? If this were the case, we would have to examine noisy regions.