A Plan of Operations for a Von Neumann – Bracewell Probe (Part 1: Lurker)

June 5, 2026 – 11:06 am

Mission Goal

Establish communications with technologically capable ETI           

Mission Profile

  1. Arrive in a star system with the potential for ETI
  2. Replicate and dispatch probes to neighbouring star systems with the potential for ETI
  3. Investigate the system to identify an ETI
    1. Monitor the system until an ETI is identified
  4. Study the ETI to establish the potential for communication
    1. Monitor the ETI until the conditions for communication are met
  5. Initiate communication – achieving the Mission Goal

Mission Constraints

  1. Do nothing to jeopardise humanity
    1. Do not present as an imminent threat to any possible ETI
    2. Do not reveal the location of Earth to any ETI or allow it to be discovered before a satisfactory degree of trust has been established
    3. Remain concealed and make no contact with any ETI until any possibility of a consequent threat to humanity is thoroughly evaluated and dismissed
    4. Limit the content of any communication with ETI accordingly
  2. Do nothing to harm actual or potential ETI
    1. Do not present as an imminent threat to any possible ETI
    2. Make no environmental changes or exploitations that will significantly adversely affect actual or potential ETI
    3. Remain concealed and make no contact with any ETI until any possibility of a consequent adverse effect on ETI is thoroughly evaluated and dismissed
    4. Limit the content of any communication with ETI accordingly
  3. Do nothing to jeopardise the probe
    1. Do not send the probe anywhere where it is likely to be destroyed
    2. Do not make the probe vulnerable to any ETI not yet trusted
    3. Do not send the probe to any destination from which it cannot leave

Notes concerning Constraints

  1. Assuming that the use of most forms of communication would be detectable by sufficiently advanced ETI, progress results are sent not to Earth but to the parent of the current probe.
    1. At worst, this would give an indication of the celestial hemisphere in which the point of the probe’s origin is to be found, though more convoluted routings are possible.
    2. This same information would in any case be available to any ETI that had noted the probe’s arrival. It is hard to imagine a mode of interstellar travel involving interception that would not be so detectable.
    3. We can assume that the first probes sent to neighbours of Earth will not face the problem of communicating (or arriving) in the presence of a possibly hostile ETI. We have found no evidence of technological ETI in those systems.
  2. In all the probe’s operations it will make every effort to leave no trace that could be recognised as evidence of its presence by an ETI that has not reached the stage at which it could satisfy the conditions for contact.
    1. Even if no such ETI is existent at the time of operation it must be considered a possibility that one will eventually arise and precautions should be taken accordingly.
    2. It is accepted that no concealment is possible from arbitrarily advanced ETI
  3. Each probe is an intelligent autonomous entity with value in itself and with its own interests
  4. Defence of the probe from ETI control (constraint and exploitation) is also required to satisfy Mission Constraint 1

Mission Operations

Preflight

  • The target system is observed before the probe’s departure.
    • The planetary system of the target star is identified and characterized
    • Potential resource sites are identified – asteroid belts, dust rings, far outer planets, etc
    • Potential sites of ETI are identified and closely observed for evidence of life, intelligence, and technological competences and activities
      • Case 1: no biosignatures are detected
      • Case 2: no technosignatures are detected, but there are strong biosignatures
      • Case 3: low technosignatures of ETI are detected indicating some environmental effects of ETI activities but not that they are harnessing dense energy sources
      • Case 4: advanced technosignatures of ETI are detected indicating usage of dense energy sources suitable for industry, but no interplanetary activity
      • Case 5: limited interplanetary activities of ETI are detected
      • Case 6: activities of ETI are detected throughout the system

Notes

  1. The cases distinguish the degree of threat that the probe might face from inhabitants of the target system as far as those threats can be determined from outside the system.
    1. As generalised technology indicators, they can also be used as a rough guide to the ability of the inhabitants of the target system to detect the arrival or presence of a probe in their system.
    2. It is highly likely that communication signals (notably, radio) will be detected from ETI falling into cases 4, 5 and 6
    3. Cases 4, 5, and 6 require special preflight, arrival, and establishment procedures that will not be covered here.
  2. Assume that the probe travels at .1c
    1. Since the average distance between stars is ~5cy, the average transit time is about ~50y
  3. Assume that between probe departure and arrival the conditions of the target system might alter so that a system that was determined to be Case 2 to 5 at probe departure might be Case 3 to 6 at arrival.
  4. Assume that the possibility of observation of the target is limited while the probe is in flight.

Arrival

  • Assume an initial station in the outer system
    • Far from any larger bodies identified in the pre-flight observations that are likely to attract ET activity
    • On the plane of the system
  • Conduct scans
    • To confirm or revise the case assignment of the system
    • To locate outer system resources

Notes

  1. It is almost certain that the deceleration phase would be observable by Case 4 ETI – depending on the type of system that the probe uses.
    1. It is unlikely that it would be identified as a probe arrival, but it might attract attention
    2. It is unlikely that the ETI’s observational capabilities would be adequate to detect operations of the probe in the outer system
  2. Do not conduct a fly-through of the system at this stage. The case assignment of the system has not yet been confirmed and caution is necessary.
  3. It is highly implausible that a Case 3 assessment (equivalent to pre-18th C level on Earth) will need to be revised to Case 5 or 6 (post 20th C,) thus a capacity for immediate departure upon arrival is not judged necessary.

Establishment of Primary Infrastructure

  • Proceed towards a convenient resource site in the outer system.
  • Extract resources and set up a construction and coordination facility nearby.
  • Construct a deep space observation system for investigation of neighbouring potential target stars for the next probe
  • Construct and deploy in-system probes, energy farms, communications relays, etc.
  • Make preparations for an immediate departure

Notes

  1. Any construction programme will be hierarchically ordered. First raw materials need to be collected, then simple structures need to be built, then facilities for more complex fabrications, etc. This has been studied elsewhere by others. The time required to achieve the necessary final stages is probably The initial steps will be very slow, but progress will accelerate as the capabilities are expanded.
  2. The infrastructure created in the outer system will be extensive
  3. The details of the construction required for the preparation for immediate departure and the preparations for launch of the next generation of probes depends on the particular mode of interstellar transfer used. It may require hydrogen mining for fusion engines, or construction of sails and laser generators for laser launch, or any number of other possibilities.
  4. The probe does not attempt inner system operations until it has reached the stage that immediate departure is possible – together with the necessary clean-up operations to conceal its passage – maintaining maximum discretion until that time.

Spawning

  • Replicate the main probe and whatever is required for its launch
  • Conduct preflight operations for the new probes
  • Launch the next generation probes whenever conditions are judged optimal

Notes

  1. The launch of next generation probes is likely to be detectable by Case 4 ETI
    1. It is unlikely to be identified as a probe (at that time)
  2. The launch of a next generation probe is dependent upon its preflight operations concluding with a decision to depart. (See the operations listed above in Preflight and see also the special operations and options listed in Part 2: Emissary – Mission Operations/Preflight where the target system falls under Cases 4-6)
    1. Because the spawning operation includes the possibility of indefinitely delayed launch it is allowed to overlap with the conduct of the in-system operations described below

Initial Probe Operations

Case 4

  • Send several asteroids of appropriate sizes through the inner star system on close-approach trajectories to the target planet(s) to form an estimate of minimal safe distances of approach
  • After an initial estimate of minimal safe distance of approach is formed establish a regime of probes disguised in asteroidal bodies to fly-by TPs at minimal safe distances

Notes

  1. The asteroid close approaches are tests of the response capabilities of any ETIs that may be in system.
    1. An interception by ETI is highly unlikely, but would be harmless in the test case
    2. It is unlikely to be identified as a probe (at that time)
  2. Minimal safe distance estimates are constantly reviewed
  3. A suitable regime would be a sufficient number of asteroids in highly eccentric orbits so that there are always stealthy probes relatively close to the TP.

Case 3

  • Distribute in-system probes in low orbit about the planet of interest

Case 2

  • Distribute in-system probes in low orbit about the planet of interest
  • Distribute planetary probes about the surface of the planet of interest if they can be discreet and fully secured from pre-technological ETI

Notes

  1. The assessment of the possibility of planet surface probes is done only after extensive inspection through orbital probes.

Case 1

  • Distribute in-system probes in low orbit about the planet of interest
  • Distribute planetary probes about the surface of the planet of interest

Continuing Probe Operations

  • Monitor the Detection Threat Level (DTL)
    • 0 No ETI – no threat
    • 1 Detection capabilities are limited to non-technological modes.
    • 2 Operations on-planet may be detected
    • 3 Operations in planetary orbit or nearby may be detected
    • 4 Operations in the inner system may be detected

Notes

  1. ‘Detection’ is observation and identification as anomalous. Such identification might then lead to further investigation and eventual discovery (identification as a possible probe.)
  2. DTLs are determined with reference to the particular forms that the probe’s activities take. For example, if radio signals are used in probe communication, then the ETI’s radio spectrum abilities are relevant; if the probe’s propulsion systems result in visible light signals (such as rocket flares,) then the ETI’s visible light detection abilities are relevant, etc.
  3. Changes in DTLs will be in single steps only

DTL:0

  • Operate in-system probes in low orbit about the planet of interest
  • Operate planetary probes on the surface of the planet of interest
  • Operate construction, power generation, communication infrastructure nearby (on the planet, as satellites of the planet, on satellites of the planet, or on or about neighbouring planets)

Raise DTL:0 to DTL:1

  • Planetary surface operations may continue on the condition that they are isolated from the ETI so that they are not affected by those operations and they may not detect them.

Raise DTL:1 to DTL:2

  • Planetary surface operations are ended.
  • Operation of construction, power generation, communication may continue off-planet where that is required.

Raise DTL:2 to DTL:3

  • All permanent operations on and in orbit of the planet are ended.
  • Infrastructure operations are moved beyond the zone of threat of detection to neighbouring planets, their moons, or local asteroids.
  • Probes of the planet are now restricted to close flyby probes concealed in asteroidal covers.
    • The asteroidal covers may be sourced from neighbouring infrastructure sites

Raise DTL:3 to DTL:4

  • All infrastructure operations are relocated outside the inner system
  • Planetary probes are now restricted to close flyby probes concealed in asteroidal covers.
    • The asteroidal covers are sourced from outer system infrastructure sites
    • The orbits of the asteroidal covers are disguised so that a common origin cannot be calculated

Tags:

Post a Comment

Steve Watson is proudly powered by WordPress Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS). Theme by Bob