Construct · 1 fields · 3 citations

Drake equation: a standalone construct

One name. One construct. A landmark on the map.

● anchor · a standalone construct Nearest construct by meaningFermi paradoxcompare the meanings
How to read this

Every construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to Drake equation is Fermi paradox.

Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.

Drakeequation1 CONSTRUCTDrake equationDRAKE · SETI EQUATION

A single standalone construct; nearby constructs are located against it in the Collider. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

Astrobiology

A formula estimating the number of communicating civilizations in the galaxy

The astronomer Frank Drake wrote this equation in 1961 as the agenda for the first scientific meeting on the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, held at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Green Bank, West Virginia, and he set it out in print a few years later (Drake, 1965), which is why it is also called the Green Bank equation. It estimates N, the number of civilizations in the Milky Way whose signals we might currently detect, as the product of seven factors: the rate at which suitable stars form, the fraction with planets, the number of habitable planets in each such system, the fraction on which life appears, the fraction of those on which intelligence evolves, the fraction that release signals into space, and the average length of time such a civilization stays detectable. Each factor turns one large unknown into a quantity that astronomy, biology, or the social sciences might in principle estimate, so the equation works less as a precise prediction and more as a shared accounting of every step between star formation and a detectable civilization. The rightmost factor, the lifetime of a communicating civilization, is the least constrained, and Frank and Sullivan (2016) recast the same terms to ask instead whether any technological species has ever arisen anywhere, a version that drops the lifetime factor. Its scope spans astrophysics, planetary science, origin-of-life chemistry, and the study of intelligence and technology, and it is the framework around which the SETI field has organized its questions (Burchell, 2006).[1][2][3]

Unit
N, a count of currently active, communicating civilizations in the Milky Way, written as the product of seven factors
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Estimated by assigning values to its seven factors from astronomical, biological, and social data, with the result reported as a wide range rather than a single figure because the later factors are poorly constrained

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

See how Drake equation sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this entry

Nearby constructs

bank1 fields · 1 citationsanchor · a standalone constructfactor3 fields · 4 citationsjingle · one word, three constructsFermi paradox1 fields · 3 citationsanchor · a standalone construct

References

  1. Drake, F. D. (1965). The radio search for intelligent extraterrestrial life. In G. Mamikunian & M. H. Briggs (Eds.), Current aspects of exobiology (pp. 323–345). Pergamon Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-1-4832-0047-7.50015-0
  2. Burchell, M. J. (2006). W(h)ither the Drake equation? International Journal of Astrobiology, 5(3), 243–250. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1473550406003107
  3. Frank, A., & Sullivan, W. T. (2016). A new empirical constraint on the prevalence of technological species in the Universe. Astrobiology, 16(5), 359–362. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2015.1418

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct