标题： 从地外微生物到外星智能：重新平衡天文学研究重点 显示英文标题

标题： From Extraterrestrial Microbes to Alien Intelligence: Rebalancing Astronomical Research Priorities

摘要： 我们考察天文学研究优先事项中的资金差异：宜居世界天文台计划在未来二十年内获得超过100亿美元的资金，而地外智能研究几乎得不到任何联邦资金。这种不平衡与科学价值和公众兴趣相矛盾，因为65%的美国人和58.2%的调查天体生物学家认为地外智能存在。实证心理学研究表明，人类对地外接触的适应力比历史认识的要强。当代研究显示了适应性反应而非大规模恐慌，这与自1993年以来将地外智能研究排除在联邦资金之外的合理性相矛盾。最近星际物体3I/ATLAS的反应说明了这种投资不足的后果：尽管预计未来十年每隔几个月就会发现新的星际物体，但没有任何资助的任务来拦截或近距离研究这些来自太阳系外的访客。我们建议建立一个全面的研究计划，以探索星际物体上的生物标志和科技标志。该计划将满足深层次的公众兴趣，同时推进检测能力，并有可能在寻找地外生命的过程中实现变革性的发现。系统性地排除地外智能研究代表了制度性偏见，而不是科学限制，需要立即重新考虑资金优先事项。 显示英文摘要

摘要： We examine the funding disparity in astronomical research priorities: the Habitable Worlds Observatory is planned to receive over $10 billion over the next two decades whereas extraterrestrial intelligence research receives nearly zero federal funding. This imbalance is in contrast to both scientific value and public interest, as 65% of Americans and 58.2% of surveyed astrobiologists believe extraterrestrial intelligence exists. Empirical psychological research demonstrates that humanity possesses greater resilience toward extraterrestrial contact than historically recognized. Contemporary studies reveal adaptive responses rather than mass panic, conflicting with the rationale for excluding extraterrestrial intelligence research from federal funding since 1993. The response to the recent interstellar object 3I/ATLAS exemplifies consequences of this underinvestment: despite discovery forecasts of a new interstellar object every few months for the coming decade, no funded missions exist to intercept or closely study these visitors from outside the Solar System. We propose establishing a comprehensive research program to explore both biosignatures and technosignatures on interstellar objects. This program would address profound public interest while advancing detection capabilities and enabling potentially transformative discoveries in the search for extraterrestrial life. The systematic exclusion of extraterrestrial intelligence research represents institutional bias rather than scientific limitation, requiring immediate reconsideration of funding priorities.