Sagan’s Blind Spot: How Chaos Theory and Genetics Reopen the Case for Astrology

Rethinking Astrology’s Scientific Basis

For millennia, we have stared into that inky blackness, into that glittering cosmic abyss, and we have felt a connection. It’s a profound human impulse. To see the stars and wonder: are we a part of that? Are our lives, our destinies, entwined in those celestial patterns? This is the heart of astrology – an idea as ancient as it is persistent.

Sagan’s Twin Paradox

Carl Sagan took a look at this in his landmark series Cosmos. He was a master at applying simple, elegant logic to big claims. He posed a challenge – a beautiful, scientific thought experiment: identical twins.

Born minutes apart in the same place, their astrological charts are virtually indistinguishable. If astrology holds true, their lives should follow similar paths. Yet, as Sagan pointed out, their destinies often diverge wildly. One becomes an artist, the other an accountant. One is happy, one is not. For him, this was proof that astrology didn’t work. Case closed?

Well, not so fast. The universe is always more subtle and interconnected than we first assume.

The Twist in the Tale: Twins Reared Apart

Science, you see, keeps moving. After Sagan’s series, from 1979 to 1999, a groundbreaking study began: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart. And the results… wow. They are just jaw-dropping.

They found pairs of identical twins, separated at birth, who met for the first time as adults and discovered… well, uncanny similarities. The most famous are the “Jim Twins.” Separated at four weeks old. Reunited at 39.

Both had married women named Linda, divorced them, and remarried women named Betty. Both had a son named James. Both owned a dog named Toy. Both drove the same car, smoked the same cigarettes, and even vacationed at the same beach in Florida.

So, what’s going on here? Sagan’s argument was that twins born at the same time have different fates. But here we have evidence that twins born at the same time can have astonishingly similar ones, even when they don’t know each other.

The Ghost in Our Genes… and in the Cosmos?

The mainstream scientific explanation is, of course, genetics. That this is the power of our DNA: the double-helix code as a staggeringly powerful blueprint for who we are. And not just our eye color, but also our temperaments, preferences and predispositions. It’s a fantastic and simple explanation.

The Rise of Epigenetics

But a new field called epigenetics shows that’s not the whole story. Think of your DNA as a giant cookbook. Epigenetics is the master chef who decides which recipes to use based on environmental cues. The cookbook itself doesn’t change, but based on the environment – stress, diet, toxins, love, cold, heat – the chef decides which recipes to use. It adds a little molecular bookmark here, a sticky note there, telling this gene to be loud and that gene to be quiet.

The Epigenetic Chef

This is why one identical twin can get asthma and the other doesn’t. Their genetic cookbook is identical, but their chefs have made different choices based on different life experiences.

This brings us to the modern case for astrology. If the living cell is an “intelligent system” responding to its environment… what if that environment includes the cosmos? What if the “chef” is, in some small way, listening to the planets?

The Question of Mechanism

Okay. It’s a fascinating idea. So let’s test it.

Scientists have to ask: What is the force? What is the physical mechanism by which Mars – a planet whose gravitational pull on you at birth is less than the pull of the doctor delivering you – can reach into the nucleus of your cell and flip a specific epigenetic switch? Is it gravity? Electromagnetism? The strong or weak nuclear force? Which one? You have to show that a force exists.

Chaos Theory: The Butterfly Effect

How can a distant planet have any effect? This is where we must consider one of the most profound discoveries of modern science: chaos theory.

We’re all familiar with its central metaphor: the “butterfly effect,” where the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil can set off a tornado in Texas. The point is not that the butterfly has the power of a tornado, but that in a complex, dynamic system (like weather, or a human life), a minuscule, barely measurable change in the initial conditions can lead to vastly different outcomes down the line.

The Lyapunov Exponents

The Lyapunov Exponents

The moment of birth is the ultimate set of “initial conditions” for a human life, the first flutter of possibility, setting the delicate initial conditions that ripple through a life. Like butterfly wings in chaos theory, even the tiniest variations can orchestrate profound destinies.

The Butterfly Wings

This brings us to the modern case for astrology. If the living cell is an “intelligent system” responding to its environment… what if that environment includes the cosmos?

Newsflash: planets already affect life on Earth. Tides, seasons, your vitamin D levels – all cosmic puppetry.

Both gravity and electromagnetic forces can impact genetics by influencing how genes are expressed and how cells function. For example, microgravity conditions can change gene expression patterns related to cell structure, metabolism, and immune responses. Similarly, electromagnetic fields – especially magnetic fields – can also cause changes in gene activity and cell behavior, possibly affecting epigenetic modifications.

For instance gravity: Blaber, E. A., Fogle, H., Dvorochkin, N., Naqvi, S., Lee, C., Yousuf, R., … & Almeida, E. A. (2015). Microgravity induces pelvic bone loss and fatty liver through epigenetic mechanisms. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0124396.

For instance electromagnetic fields: Cui, Y., Park, J. H., & Miyamoto, Y. (2017). The effect of electromagnetic fields on the epigenetic modifications of DNA and histones. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 18(12), 2736.


Planetary Gravity as an Initial Condition

The old rebuttal that the doctor’s gravitational pull is stronger than Mars’s is a failure of imagination. It’s not about raw power. Framed by chaos theory, the subtle gravitational state of the entire solar system at the moment you are born doesn’t need to be strong; it just needs to be the initial “flap of the wings” in the incredibly complex system of your life. We have proof that these tiny forces have huge effects over time: science has confirmed that Mars’s gentle, rhythmic tug is enough to alter Earth’s orbit and drive a 2.4-million-year climate cycle. If that’s not a butterfly causing a planetary-scale tornado, what is?

Infant ponders Mars

The Moon: Its gravitational pull is so powerful it moves entire oceans, creating the daily tides. This is a tangible, physical force exerted upon the planet and every living thing on it, a rhythmic pulse that has shaped coastal life for eons.

The following table provides a comprehensive comparison of the maximum possible tide-generating force of the Sun and all planets relative to the Moon:

External forces of gravity on Earth

Planetary Electromagnetism as an Initial Condition:

We know planets are not inert. They are dynamic worlds broadcasting unique energetic signatures. Jupiter and Saturn emit powerful radio waves detectable on Earth. These are not brute forces, but tiny variations in the initial electromagnetic environment – part of the unique cosmic “weather pattern” you were born into. They are another set of butterfly wings, flapping at the precise moment your own complex system began its journey.

The Sun: Its cycles govern our seasons, our climate, and the circadian rhythms that are hard-wired into our biology. The Sun’s immense electromagnetic energy literally fuels our world and directly impacts Earth’s magnetic shield. Its influence is total.

The Radio Planets

The following chart details the magnetic moment of each planet – a measure of the magnetic field’s overall strength – relative to Earth’s.

External electromagnetic forces on Earth

Jupiter‘s powerful magnetosphere accelerates charged particles to incredible energies, producing intense radio waves. These “decametric” radio bursts are so powerful that, at certain frequencies, Jupiter can be the brightest object in the sky after the Sun.

Saturn is a source of intense radio emissions, much like Jupiter. Its auroral radio waves, known as Saturn Kilometric Radiation (SKR), are similar to Jupiter’s but are not powerful enough to be detected by radio telescopes on Earth. However, Saturn produces another, more powerful type of radio signal from massive lightning storms in its atmosphere. These signals, called Saturn Electrostatic Discharges (SEDs), are at least 10,000 times stronger than emissions from terrestrial lightning and have been successfully detected by ground-based radio telescopes.

Uranus and Neptune: The Voyager 2 spacecraft confirmed that both Uranus and Neptune are “radio planets” with complex radio emissions generated by their magnetic fields. However, their radio signals are considerably weaker than those from Jupiter and Saturn. While a tentative detection of Uranus was reported by an Earth-orbiting satellite in the 1970s, the signal was difficult to distinguish from terrestrial interference.

The other rocky planets, Venus and Mars, do not have significant global magnetic fields and are not known to be sources of noticeable radio emissions. However, you will hear radio waves coming from those planets in the following recording:

Our Universe Is Not Silent

All planets in our solar system emit waves, gravitational and electromagnetic. NASA recorded radio waves from planets with the help of spacecraft. They then converted the signals into the audible range of human hearing (20-20,000 Hz). So, you can listen to all planet sounds from space.

Listen to the radio sounds of the planets in our solar system.

A New Cosmic Perspective

I have presented here a number of arguments of why astrology may actually have a scientific basis. Chaos theory explains how small initial differences can have a huge effect. Sagan’s initial argument against serious astrology, is shown to be inconclusive.

There’s a case to be made for the infinitesimal influence of the planets on our DNA, magnified through the Lyapunov exponents.

And I haven’t even touched on the possibility of quantum entanglement of our atoms with the cosmos.

Comparison of similarities between brain astrocyte cells and the cosmic web.

The universe is connected. We are stardust. Now that is a cosmic perspective.


Empirical Evidence

The one characteristic that sets astrology apart from science, and which is cited consistently by sceptics, is the lack of empirical evidence. There are plenty of anecdotes, but quantifiable repeatable evidence?

Not so much, apparently.

Of course, I could tell you that I worked in Brussels in 1989 for a NATO defence contractor, and the manager asked me my star sign, and I told him “Aquarius”, upon which he shook his head and told me: ” I knew it. We have 120 employees here, and 80 of them are Aquarius”. Enough with the anecdotes!

I searched around a bit and found this study in a Postgraduate Medical Journal:

Written in the stars: did your specialty choose you?, by Holly Morgan, Hannah Collins, Sacha Moore, and Catherine Eley, 2022.

They surveyed 1,923 physicians in the UK and uncovered some surprisingly specific, and sometimes quirky, correlations between their zodiac signs, personality traits, and the medical fields they chose.

The patterns they found are intriguing:
Physicians specializing in Care of the Elderly were more likely to be Geminis, known for their communication skills, than Cancers (16.1% vs 2.3%).

Heart of a Lion: Cardiologists, who deal with the heart, were far more likely to be Leos. In the study, 14.4% of cardiologists were Leos, compared to just 3.9% who were Aries.

A Womb with a View: Obstetrics and Gynecology was dominated by Pisces. A full 17.5% of OB-GYNs were Pisces, while there were zero doctors in that specialty who were Sagittarius.

The Practical Capricorn: Those in General Medicine were more likely to be Capricorns (10.4%) than their Aquarius colleagues (6.7%).


Addendum
The Cosmic Irony of Sagan’s Birth Chart

I really wanted to do a horoscope of Carl Sagan:

Birth Information:
Name: Carl Edward Sagan
Date of Birth: November 9, 1934
Time of Birth: 5:05 PM (17:05:00)
Place of Birth: Brooklyn, New York, U.S.

I hit a road block because there is no reliable or verifiable source for his exact birth time. Carl Sagan never spoke about it, nor have his relatives.

An Unverified Source

Carl Sagan’s birth time supposedly was 17:05:00, with the singular source cited as ‘765 Notable Horoscopes‘ on the AstroSage website. ‘Notable Horoscopes’ is a book by B.V. Raman, a respected figure in Vedic astrology. This provided an adhoc time and a traceable source: https://www.astrosage.com/celebrity-horoscope/carl-sagan-birth-chart.asp

A Product of Circular Reasoning

But this raises a number of red flags: his birth time is traced back only to a single origin: a compendium of horoscopes created for the practice of astrology, not for historical accuracy. The claim is contradicted by the complete absence of this information in all reliable records, including extensive biographies, institutional archives, Sagan’s personal papers, and accounts from his family.

The specificity of the time suggests it is not a recorded fact but a “rectified” time, calculated backward to fit a preconceived astrological model, rendering it a product of circular reasoning.

The existence of an unverified astrological birth time for Carl Sagan is not merely a piece of biographical trivia; it is a profound and telling irony.

The sole claim for his time of birth -17:05:00- is uncorroborated, without merit, and should be dismissed as a biographical fact.

I was peeved by this. There’s no record of Carl Sagan’s birth time? I decided to dig deeper.


The Search for the Certificate

With the help of “Upwork”, a professional genealogist and the librarian of the Library of Congress I tracked down Carl Sagan’s birth announcement.

It was deposited in the Seth McFarlane collection. But unfortunately the hospital didn’t write the time of Carl’s birth down. And his birth certificate is sealed from the public until 2035, or some such (100 years after his birth).

An impression of Carl Edward Sagan’s birth announcement.

And there you go. Of course Sagan – the man who spent decades debunking astrology – would ghost us on his own birth time. The cosmic joke writes itself: the astronomer who demanded evidence for the stars’ influence left us no evidence to test his own chart.

But was it only Sagan who is a sceptic of astrology? No, some Christians also have an uneasy time with it… I thought about it briefly, and then found an argument in favour of astrology, related to Christianity, that is hard to dismiss.


The Divine Symphony: A Christian Case for the Stars

While some Christian interpretations of Astrology focus on biblical prohibitions, a deeper reading reveals a more nuanced and even positive relationship between God, the heavens, and humanity. Rather than seeing astrology as a forbidden practice, we can view it as an ancient and intuitive language through which God communicates with all of creation, a truth powerfully demonstrated at the very birth of Christ.

Three Magi follow a star

The birth of Christ was not just announced despite astrology; it was announced through it. The journey of the Magi is a powerful testament that no field of human knowledge is outside of God’s reach. The heavens are not a source of pagan fear but a canvas for divine glory. The story powerfully suggests that for those who seek with a sincere heart, the stars themselves will bow and point the way to the true King.

The Heavens Declare the Glory of God

Psalm 19:1 states this beautifully: “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.”

In this light, astrology is not a departure from God but an attempt to listen to what His creation is saying. It is an act of paying attention. Why would God create such a magnificent and orderly celestial clockwork if not for it to hold meaning and purpose?

The Goal Determines the Goodness of the Practice

The biblical prohibitions against “divination” are aimed at idolatry—the act of replacing God with something else. They forbid seeking guidance from the stars instead of God. The Magi, however, did the exact opposite.

The Magi: Honored Heroes of the Faith

The story of the Magi is not a cautionary tale, but a story of honor. These astrologers from the East are the first Gentiles in the Gospel of Matthew to recognize and worship Jesus. They are presented as wise, diligent, and faithful seekers.

God Meets Us Where We Are

A loving God communicates with people in a language they can understand. He spoke to fishermen in terms of fishing (“I will make you fishers of men”) and to farmers through parables of sowing seeds. To the Magi, who dedicated their lives to reading the heavens, God spoke through a Star.

A Divine Endorsement: By placing a special star in the sky, God was not setting a trap; He was validating their search. He affirmed that their study of the cosmos was a legitimate path that could lead to Him. The Star of Bethlehem can be seen as God’s ultimate seal of approval on the search for divine truth within the patterns of creation.

The Sagan Paradox Chapter 9: GOLDILOCKS IN OUR COSMIC NEIGHBORHOOD

The article moves from the general historical context of SETI to a specific, modern candidate for life, then to a mysterious signal from that candidate, critiquing the scientific response to potential extraterrestrial signals, presenting an alternative theory for the signal, and finally broadening the discussion to the overall limitations of the SETI methodology.

A Sagan-Sized Question

For decades, the search for extraterrestrial life was haunted by a daunting sense of scale. In a 1969 lecture that laid the foundation for modern UFO skepticism, Carl Sagan imagined our cosmic neighbors searching for us by a random principle: sending a spaceship to any old star and simply hoping for the best. More often than not, he assumed, they would find nothing. The universe was a colossal haystack, and intelligent life was a single, lonely needle.

It is a triumph of modern astronomy that this picture has been completely overturned. Today, we know of promising candidates for life-bearing planets right in our cosmic backyard. The proverbial haystack, it turns out, might just be a needle factory.

Proxima b’s orbit is in the habitable zone, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be habitable.

From Random Hopes to Targeted Searches

We are no longer searching blindly. Armed not with metal detectors but with powerful telescopes, we can pinpoint the most likely worlds to harbor life. An intelligent civilization on Earth would not send probes randomly into the void; we would send them to these promising targets. And there are many.

In 2016, astronomers discovered one such target: Proxima Centauri b in the Alpha Centauri system: a potentially habitable planet orbiting the closest star to our sun, a mere 4.2 light-years away. While its parent star’s fierce solar winds make surface picnics unlikely, life could theoretically thrive in subterranean shelters.

In an unrealized project, NASA studied in 1987 the possibility of reaching the orbit of Proxima Centauri b within just 100 years at 4.5% the speed of light. This project was named Longshot, and it was about sending an unmanned probe using nuclear propulsion.

If our initial observations of such a world prove inconclusive in the search for life, what would we do? We would do what we are already doing with Mars: we would send probe after probe until we could be certain. Why would an alien intelligence, having discovered a promising blue dot called Earth, be any different? And from a distance, what do our own Martian space probes look like, if not unidentified flying objects?

Human spacecraft approaches Mars, Enlargement of oil on canvas panel for NASA Headquarters. By Don Davis.

A Tantalizing Whisper from Proxima b

In a remarkable coincidence, just as we began to focus on Proxima b in the search for extraterrestrial life, a potential signal emerged from its direction. In April and May of 2019, the Parkes radio telescope in Australia detected a strange, narrow-band radio emission. Dubbed Breakthrough Listen Candidate 1 (BLC1), initially it was classified as a possible sign from an alien civilization.

Parkes Radio Telescope, by Diceman Stephen West, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

The signal’s characteristics were puzzling. Its Doppler shift—the change in its frequency—appeared to be the opposite of what would be expected from the planet’s orbit. Curiously, the signal appeared 10 days after a major solar flare from Proxima Centauri, though no link has been established. The primary investigators were two interns, Shane Smith and Sofia Sheikh. They worked cautiously to rule out terrestrial interference.

Some senior researchers did review the results but found nothing of note.


Long Delay

The BLC-1 signal was first reported publicly 1.5 years after its detection, and only because it was leaked to The Guardian newspaper. The public then had to wait another year for the final results. People were puzzled by the secrecy which fueled speculation.

Delays in announcing a discovery—or non-discovery—within SETI and astronomy are standard practice. Data are not released to the public until they have been verified. For instance, when radio stars were first discovered in 1967, it took two years before the discovery was published. The scientists held on to their data until they found what they considered a plausible natural explanation. The supposed Pulsar mechanism remains a mystery to this day.

This delay practice by SETI can give the impression that data are withheld until “natural explanations” have been found; radio-frequency interference (RFI) is one such explanation.

“Ultimately, I think we’ll be able to convince ourselves that BLC-1 is interference.”

– Andrew Siemion, SETI Principal Investigator for Breakthrough Listen

Within the SETI community, Siemion’s statement exemplifies scientific humility and the cautious process necessary to distinguish genuine signals from interference. Outside SETI, analogous statements can be understood as masking underlying biases or reluctance to accept paradigm-shifting discoveries. This highlights how context influences the interpretation of such remarks.


How long did Earth listen for the BLC-1 signal?

Breakthrough Listen reserved 30 hours on the Parkes telescope to observe Proxima Centauri, but the putative signal was detected during only about three of those hours—roughly 10 % of the total observing time.

During the next six months the team logged another 39 hours of follow-up observations. Out of the 4,320 hours in that half-year, just 0.9 % was spent searching for a repeat—about one-tenth of the effort devoted to the original scan.

The question remains: Was a longer campaign warranted? More generally, aren’t extended observing campaigns in radio-astronomical SETI necessary? We cannot presume that extraterrestrial civilizations broadcast continuous signals; those transmissions may be the only ones we ever detect, and even then only by chance.

BLC-1 has underscored that, when practicable, observations of potential technosignatures should be conducted from at least two different observing sites simultaneously. That this wasn’t done in the case of BLC-1 is inexplicable.

What would be the worst case when announcing the discovery of extraterrestrial technological intelligence?

A mass panic? That later investigations prove the discovery to be wrong and it has to be retracted? Thus discrediting the field of SETI? Or that humankind no longer occupies the pinnacle of evolution in the Cosmos? Would this discovery temper humankinds worst instincts, such as warfare, to the detriment of despotic rulers?


A “Galactic Communications Grid” and BLC-1

At first glance, detecting a narrowband radio signal (e.g., BLC-1) from Proxima Centauri—the star system next door—seems fantastically unlikely. Astrophysicist Jason T. Wright countered that, from an engineering standpoint, Proxima is exactly where we should expect to find such a transmission.

If a galactic communication network exists, Proxima would be the most likely “last mile” transmitter to the Solar System. Instead of every civilization trying to beam powerful, targeted messages to every other star system they want to contact, they would establish a network of communication nodes or relays.


Proxima as the Solar System’s “Cell Tower”

Proxima as the Solar System’s “Cell Tower”
In this scenario, Proxima Centauri—the closest star to our Solar System—serves as the logical “cell tower.” A message intended for our region of space would be routed through the galactic network to the Proxima Centauri system. A transmitter located there would then handle the “last mile” broadcast to the Solar System.

These nodes in the Galactic Communications Grid would need to ping each other regularly. But since radio waves travel at the speed of light, a single ping would take over eight years (accounting for the 4.24-light-year distance and signal processing time). Given this limitation, perhaps there’s another way to communicate with extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI)?

The speed of light is fixed for electromagnetic radio waves—but what about physical objects? And I’m not primarily referring to warp technology, but rather to objects that might already be here.


The Trouble with SETI

ET to SETI: can you hear us now?
ET to SETI: can you hear us now?

 SETI’s foundational premise is that extraterrestrial civilizations would likely be light-years away, not operating stealthily in Earth’s atmosphere. The hundreds of thousands of reported UFO sighting are perceived by SETI as being mostly the product of wishful thinking, misinterpretations and fakes.

Because UAPs/UFOs have no confirmed extraterrestrial link, SETI has no scientific basis for allocating resources to them. Consequently, no scientific efforts are undertaken to attempt contact with UAPs by radio or other signalling methods (e.g., lasers).

To qualify as a genuine ETI radio signal, the signal must come from far away and its detection must be reproducible. Otherwise it risks being classified as interference outright.

Highly directional, sensitive radio telescopes are not suited for close-range communication. For this reason, the Contact Project has suggested involving amateur radio operators (hams), whose omnidirectional antennas could be used in communication attempts with UAPs.

SETI with directional AND omnidirectional antennas, for far-and close-range Rx/Tx searches

Scientific Observational Attempts to Detect UAPs/UFOs

Harvard astrophysicist Avi Loeb has been leading the Galileo Project, one branch of his project is the detection of possible radio emissions from UAPs.

With new observatories online Avi Loeb is challenging the scientific establishment by taking UAPs seriously.

He sensationally declared he’s looking for intelligent life in deep space, blasting: “I’m interested in intelligence in outer space because I don’t find it very often here on Earth!”

The definition of his job is simple. “What is it to be a scientist?” he asks. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s the privilege of being curious.” It is this foundational principle that now drives one of the most ambitious and controversial scientific endeavors of our time: the Galileo Project. In an age of polarized opinion, the project aims to rise above the noise by focusing on a single, unimpeachable authority. “In science,” he declares, “the arbitrator is the physical reality.”

The project, which is now in full swing in the summer of 2025, was born from a frustration with a scientific community he sees as often too quick to dismiss the unknown. The turning point was the baffling 2017 interstellar visitor, ‘Oumuamua. Its strange, flat shape and its acceleration away from the sun without a visible cometary tail led him to suggest it could be an artifact of an alien technology. The backlash was swift. He recalls a colleague, an expert on rocks, confiding that ‘Oumuamua was “so weird I wish it never existed”—a statement project leader Avi Loeb sees as the antithesis of scientific curiosity.

The Mysterious Signal from Proxima Centauri: How Scientists Solved a Cosmic Whodunit

The Discovery That (almost) Fooled Astronomers

In April 2019, astronomers with the Breakthrough Listen project detected something extraordinary: a narrow radio signal at 982 MHz, seemingly emanating from Proxima Centauri, our solar system’s closest stellar neighbor. Dubbed BLC1 (Breakthrough Listen Candidate 1), the signal had all the hallmarks of a technosignature—a potential transmission from an extraterrestrial civilization.

For a brief moment, the world dared to wonder: Had we finally found evidence of alien technology?

But as scientists dug deeper, the truth proved far more mundane—and far more fascinating.

The Case for BLC1 as an Alien Signal

At first glance, BLC1 was the most compelling candidate in the history of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI):

Precise frequency: The signal was laser-sharp, just a few Hertz wide—something natural astrophysical phenomena can’t produce.

Non-zero drift: Its frequency drifted at 0.03 Hz/s, consistent with a transmitter on a planet like Proxima b.

Localized: It appeared only when the telescope pointed at Proxima Centauri, vanishing during off-source scans.

“The signal appears to only show up in our data when we’re looking in the direction of Proxima Centauri, which is exciting,” Ms. Sheikh said.

The Plot Twist: A Cosmic False Alarm

The Breakthrough Listen team subjected BLC1 to relentless scrutiny—and cracks began to appear.

May 2nd 2019, a possible BLC1 redetection: radio dish is pointed at Proxima b

1. The Drift That Didn’t Fit

If BLC1 came from Proxima b, its frequency drift should have shown:

Cyclical variation (rising and falling as the planet rotated).
Orbital signatures (subtle shifts tied to its 11.2-day year).

Instead, the drift was strangely linear—more like a glitching human device than an alien beacon.

2. The RFI Doppelgängers

Then, researchers found dozens of similar signals at frequencies like 712 MHz and 1062 MHz—all mathematically linked to common radio interference (RFI). These “lookalikes” had the same drift behavior but were unmistakably human-made, appearing even when the telescope wasn’t pointed at Proxima.

BLC1 wasn’t a lone anomaly—it was part of a pattern.

3. The Cadence Coincidence

The final clue? BLC1’s timing matched the telescope’s observing schedule.

On-source (30 min): Signal detectable.
Off-source (5 min): Signal too faint to see.

This created an illusion of localization—like a flickering streetlight that only seems to work when you walk by.

The Verdict: A Cosmic Mirage

After a year of analysis, the team concluded: BLC1 was interference, likely from:

Intermodulation: A “ghost” signal created when two radio waves mixed in faulty electronics.

A malfunctioning device (possibly hundreds of miles from the observatory).

Lessons for the Hunt for Alien Life

BLC1’s rise and fall taught scientists three critical lessons:

Single telescopes are vulnerable to false alarms. Future searches need global networks to cross-check signals.

The search is worth it.

For now, Proxima Centauri’s secrets remain hidden. But the hunt continues.

BLC1 wasn’t aliens—but as SETI enters a new era (with projects like the Square Kilometer Array), we’re better prepared than ever to answer humanity’s oldest question: Are we alone?

Primary Research Papers

These two papers were published concurrently and should be read together for a complete understanding of the BLC1 signal, from its detection to its ultimate classification as interference.

  1. A radio technosignature search towards Proxima Centauri resulting in a signal of interest
    • Authors: Shane Smith, Danny C. Price, Sofia Z. Sheikh, et al.
    • Journal: Nature Astronomy
    • Link to paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-021-01479-w
    • arXiv (free preprint): https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.08007
    • Abstract: This paper describes the overall search for technosignatures from Proxima Centauri and the initial detection of the BLC1 signal. It details the characteristics that made BLC1 an intriguing candidate.
  2. Analysis of the Breakthrough Listen signal of interest blc1 with a technosignature verification framework
    • Authors: Sofia Z. Sheikh, Shane Smith, Danny C. Price, et al.
    • Journal: Nature Astronomy
    • Link to paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-021-01508-8
    • arXiv (free preprint): https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.06350
    • Abstract: This is the companion paper that provides a deep dive into the analysis of BLC1. It outlines the verification framework used and presents the evidence that led to the conclusion that BLC1 was a product of human-generated radio frequency interference.

Additional Resources from Breakthrough Listen

The Breakthrough Listen initiative has also made a wealth of information about BLC1 available to the public.

  • BLC1 – Breakthrough Listen’s First “Signal of Interest”: This is the main resource page from the Berkeley SETI Research Center, providing summaries, links to the papers, data, and other supplementary materials.
  • Breakthrough Initiatives Press Release: This press release gives a good overview of the findings in an accessible format.

Unexplained Starlight Pulses: Is Advanced Tech Operating Covertly in Our Cosmic Neighborhood?

For decades, humanity has peered into the vast darkness between the stars, dreaming of the moment we might detect a sign of intelligence beyond our own. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) has long focused on distant radio whispers or powerful laser flashes, while intriguingly, starlight pulses might reveal clues right in our cosmic backyard. But what if the most profound evidence isn’t coming from light-years away? Could it be from our very own cosmic backyard? Recent, startling discoveries from a dedicated optical observatory in Big Bear, California, are forcing us to confront this very question.


In May 2023, retired NASA scientist Richard Stanton, working in Big Bear, California, discovered an unexplained “pulsing” signal from a Sun-like star, HD 89389, in the Ursa Major (Great Bear) constellation. This star is approximately 100 light-years away. The signal was described as two identical and fast pulses occurring 4.4 seconds apart. It was published in the Acta Astronautica scientific journal.

Stanton noted that these pulses were unlike any other signals he’d detected during his 1,500 hours of searching. The signal’s unique pattern has left scientists puzzled. This pattern, consisting of a “brighter-fainter-brighter” sequence, is intriguing to researchers.


“We don’t know what kind of object could produce these pulses or how far away it is. We don’t know if the two-pulse signal is produced by something passing between us and the star or if it is generated by something that modulates the star’s light without moving across the field. Until we learn more, we can’t even say whether or not extraterrestrials are involved!
Richard Stanton


Stanton has unveiled a truly perplexing phenomenon: pairs of incredibly fast, identical pulses of starlight. Imagine a star’s brightness undergoing a sudden, dramatic dance. There’s a rapid surge, then a sharp dip, followed by an equally swift return to its original intensity.

This entire sequence unfolds in mere milliseconds. After a brief pause of a few seconds, the exact same intricate pattern repeats. This occurs with precision that defies natural explanation.


Cosmic Code: Unraveling the Twin Pulses

The first captivating instance came from the star HD89389. The near-perfect replication of the “fine-structure” within each pulse wasn’t just intriguing; it screamed of a deliberate, non-random event. Even more chillingly, a deep dive into historical data uncovered an identical pair of pulses from HD217014. This occurred four years prior. This earlier event had been casually dismissed as “birds” – an innocuous explanation that now seems inadequate for such a profound celestial signature.


Not Just Birds: A Galactic Mystery

The implications are staggering. The sheer speed of these light changes immediately tells us one crucial thing: the source cannot be the distant star itself. No known stellar process could cause such rapid, precise fluctuations. This realization narrows the field dramatically. It places the origin of these mysterious flashes much closer to home, likely within our own solar system.


Close Encounter? Tracing the Origin

So, if not the stars, then what? While natural phenomena like unusual atmospheric disturbances or even binary asteroid systems are considered, the precision and repeatable nature of these pulses push scientists towards a more audacious hypothesis. They suspect edge diffraction, a well-understood optical effect. It describes how light bends and creates distinct patterns when passing by a sharp edge. The specific “bipolar” shape of these observed pulses – the characteristic increase, decrease, and subsequent increase in brightness – bears an uncanny resemblance to diffraction patterns expected if starlight interacts with edges of a nearby, opaque object.


Diffraction’s Clue: The Shadow of Something Else

Think of it this way: a previously unknown object, possibly a thin, flat structure or even a ring, momentarily crosses our line of sight to a distant star. As the star’s light skims past one edge, it creates the first pulse. When it passes the other edge, the second identical pulse is generated.


Eyes Wide Open: The Hunt for Hidden Objects

This theory, while still under investigation, ignites a firestorm of possibilities. If these are indeed diffraction patterns, it implies an object’s existence, possibly within our solar system, that is causing these obscurations. What kind of object? And more importantly, who or what created it?

A single telescope, no matter how powerful, can only offer limited clues. It can detect these fascinating anomalies. However, it can’t definitively tell us the object’s precise distance, speed, or true nature. That’s where the future of this extraordinary search comes into play.

The urgent call from the scientific community is for the development of Optical Telescope Arrays (OTAs). Imagine a network of precisely synchronized telescopes, positioned across the Earth. By meticulously measuring the infinitesimal time delays as this object’s shadow sweeps across each individual telescope, scientists could triangulate its position with astonishing accuracy. This method would determine its velocity and perhaps resolve its physical characteristics. This would be a leap from passive observation to active, investigative astronomy.


Beyond the Stars: ETI in Our Backyard?

And here, at the precipice of this discovery, lies the most profound question. If these pulses are confirmed to be caused by an object in our solar system, and if its trajectory suggests it’s not a natural body – what then? Could it be a long-lost piece of cosmic debris or an anomalous natural formation? Or, the thought that sends shivers through us, could this be a sign of extraterrestrial intelligence? Perhaps the ultimate “SETI signal” isn’t a deliberate message beamed across the galaxy. Could it be the unavoidable, accidental, signature of advanced technology operating in our celestial neighborhood?


The Ultimate Question: Are We Witnessing Alien Tech?

The universe continues to surprise us, challenging our assumptions and pushing the boundaries of what we believe possible. These inexplicable starlight flashes are more than just an astronomical curiosity; indeed, they are a cosmic riddle. It could, just possibly, hold the key to answering humanity’s most enduring question: Are we truly alone? The echoes from the void are growing clearer. The potential for a paradigm-shifting discovery has never been more tangible.


Reference:

Unexplained starlight pulses found in optical SETI searches, Richard H. Stanton
Acta Astronautica, Volume 233, August 2025, Pages 302-314
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576525002449?via%3Dihub

The Sagan Paradox, Chapter 1: The Golden Record

Introduction and Carl Sagan’s Early Work

Artwork inspired by Linda Salzman Sagan’s design for the Pioneer plaque, commissioned by NASA: click here view the original design

Carl Sagan (1934–1996) was an American astronomer, astrobiologist, and author. After NASA was founded in 1958, Sagan became a consultant for the agency. His first job involved planning the explosion of an atomic bomb on the moon, the A119 project. Highly controversial, to say the least. In 1961, at the age of 27, he published a study on the atmosphere of Venus. In 1970 he researched the conditions that could lead to the emergence of life in the cosmos on distant planets. To achieve this, he exposed frequently occurring elements to the UV radiation of a young sun and observed how amino acids, the building blocks of life, were formed from them. Carl Sagan became a full professor at the astronomy department at Cornell University. Around this time, talk shows began inviting him as a popular guest to discuss the possibility of extraterrestrial life.


“Hello, Aliens!”: Voyager Probes Get Sagan’s First Broadcast

In 1972 and 1977, Carl Sagan sent the first messages to extraterrestrials into space on the panels of the space probes Pioneer 10 & 11 and the Golden Record of Voyager 1 & 2.

The gold-plated aluminum cover (L) of the Voyager golden record (R) both protects it from micrometeorite bombardment and also provides a key to playing it and deciphering Earth’s location. NASA

It contains greetings and wishes for peace from the people of Earth in 55 languages. Earthlings extend their friendship, wish happiness and health, and express hope to one day meet their cosmic neighbors. They also express the desire for goodwill and harmony among all beings in the universe.

The greetings are in alphabetical order, from Akkadian (an extinct language for over 2000 years) to Wu Chinese. The inclusion of Akkadian in this earthly record is pretty strange. One day, these transmissions might be intercepted as they pass through space by an alien culture.

Voyager’s ‘Cosmic Map’ Of Earth’s Location Is Hopelessly Wrong

With the help of the included pulsar map, these aliens could potentially find Earth. Pulsars are stars that rhythmically emit radiation, like interstellar lighthouses. We can use them as a cosmic GPS.


Pulsar GPS: Sagan’s Star-Beacon Timecode Reveals 1971 Earth

Over long periods of time, the frequency of a pulsar slows down. Thus the pulsar map designed by scientist Frank Drake and graphic artist Linda Salzman Sagan is not only a determination of the position of our Earth in space, but the map also precisely pinpoints the position of Earth in time: 1971.

What if a prospective alien civilization has or develops the ability to time travel? What would they do with the information provided by our space probes?

Speculation about the subject makes for the greatest sci-fi story ever told. This is particularly true when we consider the included Mesopotamian-language greeting and the Annunaki creation myths—some of which have been popularized by Zecharia Sitchin and others.

Of course, intercepting our space probes is extremely unlikely. It could take millions of years, if at all. But then again, the life expectancy of the Golden Records is 5 billion years.

Aliens recovering the Golden Record

Posing the Cosmic Question: What Occurs Within a Black Hole?

AI’s Provocative Claim: “Humans Are Ignorant”

Consider the following intriguing questions: What happens to the very dimensions of spacetime inside a black hole? Different responses from an AI highlight both our current understanding—and our limitations.

Pablo Carlos Budassi, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

First Perspective: Continuity of Four-Dimensional Spacetime

One reply asserts that objects falling into a black hole do not lose any dimensions. In this view, spacetime retains its four-dimensional structure (three dimensions of space plus one of time) both outside and inside the event horizon. The singularity—where density becomes infinite—is not actually a state reduced to 1D. Instead, it represents a point where general relativity breaks down after entering a black hole. Although quantum gravity theories such as loop quantum gravity propose alternatives (for instance, “bounces” that avoid the singular state), none of these ideas involve a reduction in the number of dimensions.

Second Perspective: Dimensional Breakdown at the Singularity

A subsequent response from the same AI emphasizes a different perspective. In Einstein’s theory, the singularity is defined as a point of infinite density and extreme spacetime curvature. It is where the equations of general relativity “break down.” In this classical picture, spacetime loses its well-defined four-dimensional structure (3 spatial dimensions plus 1 time dimension). For non-rotating, or Schwarzschild, black holes, the singularity is described as a 0D point. In contrast, for rotating (Kerr) black holes, the singularity takes on the form of a 1D ring.

Urbane Legend, CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/, via Wikimedia Commons

Reconciling the Contradiction: Artifacts of Mathematical Models

The AI explains these seemingly contradictory responses with a reminder that, in general relativity, the singularity is not a physical object. Instead, it is a mathematical artifact. The labels “0D” and “1D” serve as geometric shorthand—conceptual placeholders that indicate where our classical theories fail. In effect, these designations (“here be dragons”) acknowledge the limits of our current understanding of extreme gravitational environments, especially those involving black holes.


Embracing the Unknown in Theoretical Physics

In summary, one perspective maintains that spacetime remains four-dimensional throughout the journey into a black hole. This is true even as general relativity breaks down at the singularity. Another viewpoint suggests that, near the singularity, the familiar four-dimensional framework is lost. It collapses into a 0D point or a 1D ring depending on the black hole’s rotation. Ultimately, both answers are reminders of the limits of our current theories and the continuing challenge of unifying general relativity with quantum mechanics.


Stephen Hawking’s Insight: Illuminating Our Limitations

An illustrative image from Stephen Hawking’s Reith Lecture on 26 January 2016 further underscores this point. Hawking’s insights remind us that while our current models of black holes capture many aspects of reality, they also expose profound gaps in our knowledge.

Until a successful theory of quantum gravity is developed, these descriptions remain approximations. They reflect human ignorance as much as our understanding.

Image: from Stephen Hawking Reith lecture, 26 January 2016