Errata

Beyond Contact

Errata for Beyond Contact

Submit your own errata for this product.

The errata list is a list of errors and their corrections that were found after the product was released.

The following errata were submitted by our customers and have not yet been approved or disproved by the author or editor. They solely represent the opinion of the customer.

Color Key: Serious technical mistake Minor technical mistake Language or formatting error Typo Question Note Update

Version Location Description Submitted by Date submitted
Printed Page 31
Fifth paragraph

"The example above" in this paragraph does not exist above, but rather on
the next page.

Anonymous   
Printed Page 68
top half (Deadly Probes Hypothesis)

As stated, the Deadly Probes Hypothesis postulates Von Neuman probes that:

i) detect EM radiation from planets, and
ii) destroy such planets.

However, there is a serious logical flaw here. Should a civilization construct a
network of such probes, why would the probes wait for EM radiation?

Given the existence of such probes, it would be trivial to detect earlier stages of a
civilization's development by sending probes to each potential solar system or
planet, and watching for the development of intelligent species (e.g. buildings,
cities, lights, satellites, etc.) - or even life itself - from close up. (Since we
are assuming von Neuman probes, this is simple to do since they are self-
replicating.)

(If a civilization were cautious / paranoid enough, they could even monitor planets
remotely, and launch destructive countermeasures as soon as life-indicating
ingredients were detected in an atmosphere.)

Waiting until EM radiation has been sent out would be unnecessarily risky - how could
one know that a new civilization hadn't developed fast enough to already be in space
by the time countermeasures were taken, or indeed was paranoid enough to operate in
stealth mode from day one

Anonymous   
Printed Page 154
1st paragraph

The phrase "as observed from Earth's equator" should come after, and not before, the phrase "whose primary
frequency".

Anonymous   
Printed Page 259
Para 2, Line 1. Typo - omission of word, possibly "ask".



Anonymous   
Printed Page 272
Para 4, Line 2. Typo.



Anonymous   
Printed Page 282
Para 2, Line 3. Typo - parentheses.



Anonymous   
Printed Page 284
Note, Line 4. Typo - requires

Line 5. Typo - critical.

Anonymous   
Printed Page 324
Figure 18-5. Typo - descent.



Anonymous   
Printed Page 351
Line 2. States that "...all of the symbols, except

5101 and 5102
belong to the category 5000.
However, inspection of
Figure 20-2 shows 5101 and 5102 as
belonging to category
5100, which in turn belongs to the
category 5000.


Anonymous   
Printed Page 362
. First bullet. Typo - word omitted.



Anonymous   
Printed Page 376
Para 2 Text refers to a graph which is not

present.


Anonymous   
Printed Page 380
. Para 5 Text refers to Figure A-5 which is not

present.

Anonymous   
Printed Page 380
last paragraph

The first sentence of the last paragraph on page 380 refers to
"Figure A-5", which doesn't appear. Presumably, Figure A-3 on
page 378 is meant.

Anonymous