Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Space Burial

Posted by michael on from the burial-not-exactly-the-right-word dept.

roman_mir writes "Celestis is the name of a company that is offering space burials for some $11K USD. Isn't this nice, like there is not enough garbage in space already... So, how many of you want to be buried in space? I want to burn in the Sun (or at least the egomaniacal part of me.)"

137 of 491 comments (clear)

  1. Special 'Delivery' Instructions by PakProtector · · Score: 5, Funny

    PS: Please aim at the section of space that in the 23rd century will be off limits to all spacefarers, in which resides the Genesis planet. Please make sure to also provide good embalming and a capsule capable of shielding body from cosmic rays.

    --

    Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
    man: no entry for woman in the manual.
    "Qua!?"

    1. Re:Special 'Delivery' Instructions by ralzod · · Score: 3, Informative

      Fitting that you bring up Star Trek, since Gene Roddenberry is listed as a Founder's Flight passenger.

    2. Re:Special 'Delivery' Instructions by Professor+Bluebird · · Score: 2, Informative

      To save costs, they only launch a few grams of one's cremated ashes, and not whole bodies. As such, being launched alive is currently impossible.

  2. Broadcasting dead... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a lower cost option, these people allow you to broadcast a digital message which can contain any audio or picture format you want into space.

    They call the service Ad Astra. I like the dobule meaning of the word "ad" in that name...

    1. Re:Broadcasting dead... by DarthWiggle · · Score: 5, Funny

      so, like, Space Spam?

    2. Re:Broadcasting dead... by calmdude · · Score: 5, Funny

      What would one say on one of these things?

      A) I'm coming home momma!

      B) Please rectally probe the following people who bullied me in school...

      C) Please view the accompanying transmitted picture ... does this dress make me look fat?

    3. Re:Broadcasting dead... by Greg@UF · · Score: 5, Funny

      I want to say "This is Ripley, last survivor of the Nostromo, signing off"

      --
      -- You can't give it, you can't even buy it, and you just don't get it!
    4. Re:Broadcasting dead... by Veridium · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, exactly. This will be an excellent way to get aliens to visit us. Once they hear we have penis enlargement pills, breast enlargement pills, and all natural herbal viagra alternatives, they'll be pouring in.

      --
      Think for yourself, destroy your television.
    5. Re:Broadcasting dead... by GigsVT · · Score: 3, Funny

      Heh, I once had a ham radio friend of mine with a 1500 watt microwave setup shoot my callsign into space, for the heck of it.

      And for even more kicks, you'll be happy to know this message came to you via a satellite in geostationary orbit.

      Yes, the 600ms ping time does suck, but at least I can annoy people on IRC by saying, "GREETINGS FROM OUTER SPACE"! :)

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    6. Re:Broadcasting dead... by unitron · · Score: 4, Interesting
      "The civilisation that blurts out its existence on interstellar beacons at the first opportunity may be like some early hominid descending from the trees and calling "Here Kitty" to a sabre toothed tiger."--Robert Rood

      Only in this case it's more like "Klingon want some Viagra?".

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    7. Re:Broadcasting dead... by sadomikeyism · · Score: 5, Funny
      Actually, I can forsee an intergalactic market for human ash pills. Like the chinese penchant for tiger penises and rhino tusks, human ash capsules will be 'herbal viagra'. Considering how much the media act like dick heads all the time, media that is streaming out into space, I am sure the aliens would look at our ash capsules as aphrodesiacs.

      --
      "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves
    8. Re:Broadcasting dead... by The+Snowman · · Score: 3, Funny

      I wish I hadn't used up all my mod points, that was +1 funny... anyway, who do I talk to about donating my body to science? Seriously, my wife wants to be buried with her family, and I figure science could use my body -- how better to study the effects of alcohol on the human body than to examine my dead body? :-)

      --
      24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
    9. Re:Broadcasting dead... by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Too bad getting getting your DNA sequenced still costs too much.

      Would be kinda cool to send the instructions to build youself out into the cosmos. I am sure one could calculate the probability of a significantly advanced live form to intercept your message and build a clone of you just for the heck of it.

      Hmmm i think i smell a great plot for sci fi story.

    10. Re:Broadcasting dead... by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmmm i think i smell a great plot for sci fi story.

      Interestingly, I just read Second Genesis by Donald Moffitt, which is based on a not too dissimilar idea. (Pretty decent afternoon read, if you're into that kind of book.)

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    11. Re:Broadcasting dead... by GORby_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmm, and when the demand exceeds the supply... what do you think they will do ???
      Come to earth and incinerate a few humans for the ashes of course. I can already see the number of abduction stories increasing rapidly :-)

  3. Take down a space station by Jad+LaFields · · Score: 5, Funny

    To much garbage in space? Man that would my point for being 'buried' in space... to become a potentially dangerous piece of space debris! It would be like coming back from the dead to strike fear in the hearts of the living!

    --
    [SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
    1. Re:Take down a space station by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This service won't help you with that. The small sample of you that they send will end up vaporized on reentry.

    2. Re:Take down a space station by diersing · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Seriously, as a person that doesn't follow such things as closly as others....

      How much *space garbage* is there? How much of it will burn up on re-entry (given time)? How much is too large or in too high an orbit?

      I would think, considering the size of space we've contributing very little garbage with the most being in some sort of earth orbit. With all the NASA/USSR satellites plus all the now commerical (communications, GPS, etc) we have to have.... what?, a hundred or so devices up there?

    3. Re:Take down a space station by doj8 · · Score: 5, Informative

      According to this article (http://www.space.com/spacewatch/space_junk.html):

      "A 1999 study estimated there are some 4 million pounds of space junk in low-Earth orbit, just one part of a celestial sea of roughly 110,000 objects larger than 1 centimeter -- each big enough to damage a satellite or space-based telescope."

      Of them, "8,927 are man-made objects which are officially tracked."

      --
      -- Dan Jenkins, Rastech Inc.
    4. Re:Take down a space station by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hmm.. Getting 'buried' in a near vacuum... What a concept... Did military intelligence come up with this? or some other Oxymoronish organization? I should sign up for this then in my will leave all my money to attorneys to sue the pants off them for actually just tossing my body into space to drift and leave all the proceeds to the Open Source Community.

      --
      Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
    5. Re:Take down a space station by fireboy1919 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I personally plan to become a radioactive monster with poisonous radioactive breath that can only be stopped by trapping it in a ship and sending it into the deep space.

      It's a lot cheaper than your plan, and I still get the added bonus of the fear-striking thing.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    6. Re:Take down a space station by fireboy1919 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, and by the way, it also leaves me open for coming back in the sequel, where the ship is picked up by some garbage collectors in the distant future and I wreak havoc on a space station 500 years from now before finally being launched into the sun where I am finally and completely destroyed, leaving no hope for another sequel with me in it.

      However, the radioactive eggs that I probably laid at the time could end up hatching and once again striking the fear into the hearts of the living.

      I got it all worked out. I'm looking forward to my afterlife.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    7. Re:Take down a space station by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
      But then they'll shoot you down with lasers.

      http://www.seds.org/pub/info/newsletters/spacevi ew s/text/20000821.txt


      NASA to Test Laser "Broom" to Clean Space Junk

      NASA plans to test a laser system in 2003 that may help clear
      low-Earth orbit of debris that could pose a risk to the shuttle and
      space station.

      New Scientist magazine reported in its current issue that a
      shuttle flight in 2003 will test Project Orion, a groundbased laser
      system that would act as a "broom", sweeping out small debris from
      orbit.

      During the mission the shuttle will release small instrumented
      objects designed to simulate space debris. The objects will be
      equipped with GPS receivers so that their positions can be tracked as
      they are illuminated by a groundbased megawatt-power laser. The laser
      will vaporize part of the object's surface, creating a small amount of
      thrust that slows the object down and eventually causes it to reenter
      the Earth's atmosphere.

      If successful, the system could be used to clear out low-Earth
      orbit of small pieces of orbital debris that, because of their high
      velocities, can cause significant damage if they strike a spacecraft.
      "With a laser system we could clear from orbit all the debris between
      1 and 10 centimeters [0.4 to 4 inches] in size within two years," said
      Jonathan Campbell, head of the Project Orion effort at NASA's Marshall
      Space Flight Center.

      That size range is significant because debris of that size
      poses the greatest risk. Shielding on spacecraft can protect them
      from objects smaller than 1 cm (0.4 in.), while those larger than 10
      cm (4 in.) across can be tracked from the ground and spacecraft moved
      to avoid them. Between 1 and 10 cm, though, are objects too small to
      be tracked from the ground and too large to be effectively shielded
      against.

      Campbell and others involved with Project Orion (first
      described in SpaceViews in 1997) are optimistic that lasers can clear
      low-Earth orbits effectively and at a relatively modest cost. "We now
      know we can decelerate and de-orbit the debris with the types of laser
      that are available to us," based on a series of recent tests on the
      ground, he said.

      A two-year effort to clear debris from orbit would cost about
      $200 million, Campbell estimated. By comparison, the cost of a single
      space shuttle mission has been estimated to be as much as a half-
      billion dollars.

  4. Re: story by bentini · · Score: 5, Funny

    Quoth the poster: "I want to burn in the Sun (or at least the egomaniacal part of me.)"

    I know *exactly* how you feel.

    I want you to burn in the Sun, too.

  5. burn in hell by kiwirob · · Score: 5, Funny

    I want to burn in the Sun (or at least the egomaniacal part of me.)
    According to my ex-wife I'm gonna burn in hell when I die.

    1. Re:burn in hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      BECAUSE of your ex-wife I'm burning somewhere different altogether...

    2. Re:burn in hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      According to my ex-wife I'm gonna burn in hell when I die.
      You work for "professional search engine optimisation (SEO) company." Hell is too good for you, sir.
  6. Only so much carbon... by cgranade · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Call me crazy, mod me -1, Wrong, whatever. I just wonder about launching stuff into space for no good reason. There's only so much mass on Earth, and what happens if the mass we throw off doesn't come back? I understand what we gain by launching satellites and all, but what does this gain us? I suppose it does have some advantages over the problem of finite room to bury people, but still...

    --

    #define DRM chmod 000

    1. Re:Only so much carbon... by wowbagger · · Score: 5, Informative

      The amount of mass being launched is measured in the hundreds of kilograms per year.

      The amount of mass falling onto the earth from space is measured in the hundreds of tons per day.

      Do the math.

      --
      www.eFax.com are spammers
    2. Re:Only so much carbon... by beeplet · · Score: 5, Informative

      Considering the earth accumulates 30 million kg of space dust each year, I don't think this will be a problem. (http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news19.html)

    3. Re:Only so much carbon... by kfg · · Score: 5, Informative

      The earth's mass increases by tons a day, from the influx of space stuff. It doesn't really matter, as a percentage of the earth's mass the stuff that comes in and what we ship out is waaaaaay below the level of significant digits.

      I could sit here half the night listing reasons why launching dead granny dust into space is a pretty daft idea, but worries about unbalancing the earth's orbit or running out of carbon wouldn't be among them.

      If you took all the people in the world and packed them into a box, like sardines, without cremating, that box would have to be about 3/4 mile per side.

      That's it. All of humanity. All of humanity's mass. Poof it out into space and the earth wouldn't so much as bobble, or care.

      KFG

    4. Re:Only so much carbon... by brucmack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It doesn't gain anything, it's a business. It's not like they are a group of researchers who have concluded that space 'burial' is better than land burial. They're just there to cater to relatively well-off people who either just like the idea of being a celestial body or are somehow religious and think that they are being 'buried' closer to god.

      As for the mass on earth question, I wouldn't think the mass we've shot into space is anything to worry about. The earth is big and we aren't to the point where we can cheaply send tons of stuff into space. Even if everyone on earth were to be 'buried' there, it wouldn't cause any significant impact.

      As an aside, what's with calling it a space burial anyway? I guess it's better on the marketing than just saying they'll shoot your lifeless body into nothingness where you'll cook on one side and freeze on the other.

    5. Re:Only so much carbon... by whereiswaldo · · Score: 4, Funny

      The amount of mass being launched is measured in the hundreds of kilograms per year.

      The amount of mass falling onto the earth from space is measured in the hundreds of tons per day.

      What sorts of stuff are we launching and what sorts of stuff is falling onto the Earth? Maybe we're trading titanium for sand. Not that I think we have to worry - just a thought.

      Still, maybe launching yourself into space could prevent you from being brought back to life someday. Then again, maybe you'd be brought back to life to fight some losing battle against aliens... ;)

    6. Re:Only so much carbon... by evilmrhenry · · Score: 5, Informative

      (Note: all numbers pulled from Internet in the space of a few minutes. May be inaccurate.)

      mass of Earth:
      5.9742 x 10^24 kilograms. That's
      5,974,200,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg.

      mass of average person:
      about 100 kilograms

      number of bodies needed to change the Earth's weight by 1%:
      597,420,000,000,000,000,000

      Population of Earth:
      about 6,000,000,000

      Weight of Apollo 11:
      about 30,000 kg

      Number of Apollo 11's needed to change Earth's weight by 1%
      1,991,400,000,000,000,000

      In conclusion, the Earth is really big.

    7. Re:Only so much carbon... by kfg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I used foot and a half wide. You'll find that's about right for the average American adult male, so for humanity the figure is actually generous.

      Do the math, it might surprise you.

      Just before WWII we only would have needed a box half a mile to the side to pack away humanity, but we've grown a bit since then.

      KFG

    8. Re:Only so much carbon... by Yorrike · · Score: 5, Funny
      True as that may be, people are getting fatter...

      Say a group of zombies, or ninjas, or a killer virus that turned people into zombie ninjas, caused a good 5 billion people to die. Sure, these guys would have a booming business, but at 70Kg for each corpse, that's 350,000,000,000Kg (350 billion), which would require a millennium to replaces with space dust.

      And besides, if you're ejecting all those kadavas into space, you're just asking the aforementioned virus to evolve, giving rise to a hideous race of mutant space zombie-ninjas.

      Zombies need to eat too.

      --

      Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

    9. Re:Only so much carbon... by borgboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      okay...by your reasoning:
      1 person is 10 cubic feet of space (5x2x1)
      there are 6E9 people in the world
      10 cuft/person x 6E9 people = 6E10 cuft

      a box, 3/4 mile cube, holds 3960x3960x3960 cuft...
      that comes to 6.2E10 cubic feet.

      or, in laymans terms, enough.

      Original poster was correct, by your own figures. By his, he's at worst rather generous with the box.

      --
      meh.
    10. Re:Only so much carbon... by wrmrxxx · · Score: 2, Informative
      that box would have to be about 3/4 mile per side

      That doesn't sound right, so I've done my own quick calculation in metric. I'm assuming that the average size of a person is 50cm by 30cm (~1 foot 8 inches by 1 foot), that there are about 6 billion people, and that all of them are standing up in the box. These assumptions should be near enough, and make it easy to do without a calculator.

      area per person = 0.50m * 0.30m = 0.15m^2

      total area = 0.15m^2 * 6.0E9 = 9.0E8m^2

      length per box side = sqrt(0.9E8m^2) = 3.0E4m = 30km

      This is a lot more that 3/4 mile per side - more like 19 miles per side.

    11. Re:Only so much carbon... by Have+Blue · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you took all the people in the world and packed them into a box, like sardines, without cremating, that box would have to be about 3/4 mile per side.

      Maybe so, but can they all stand on Zanzibar?

    12. Re:Only so much carbon... by jrockway · · Score: 2, Informative

      Humans are 3D objects. Hence you can't fit them in a square. You have to use a cube, which happens to be 3/4 a mile in size.

      The calculations are correct. Amazing, eh?

      --
      My other car is first.
    13. Re:Only so much carbon... by McCrapDeluxe · · Score: 2, Funny

      You seem to have misplaced a dimension-- namely, the third.

    14. Re:Only so much carbon... by Dahan · · Score: 3, Funny
      I'm assuming that the average size of a person is 50cm by 30cm (~1 foot 8 inches by 1 foot)

      Hey, how's life down there in Flatland? *sticks fingers through wrmrxxx's plane to mess with him*

      In my universe, people are three dimensional; it's like having another degree of freedom!

  7. The perfect gift by Bobdoer · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is what you give your geek on Valentine's Day. You may have to kill them first, but it's worth it.

    --
    EVERYDAY IS CATURDAY
  8. Old news - they handled my brother by wowbagger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is old news - Celestis handled my brother back in 2000.

    --
    www.eFax.com are spammers
  9. I want to burn in the Sun by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We all will...eventually. You'll be dead anyway, so why does it matter if you get toasted in the months following your death rather than a few hundred million?

  10. Cheap by sith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This seems awfully affordable for launching anything in to space. Even if it is cremated remains, I would have expectede that it would be more expensive. Their webpage claims they have two of these in orbit already though. So all I need to do is find $11k and then cremate myself...

  11. a bit cheap by dj245 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Only $11,000? Thats pretty cheap, considering the cost of taking a pound of gear into orbit. How do they get human remains that light? Even when you cremate a body, significant bones and dust remain. What do they do, throw away most of it and just send up a little bit of each person on their sattelite? Cremated remains can weigh upwards of two to five pounds. I'm wondering if this is all a scam, considering the high cost of burial space in certain geographical areas. In some places, a burial plot can cost even more than $11,000.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    1. Re:a bit cheap by Nihynjahs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      they sends lots of lead up in with sattelites to use as a ballast i know that, so maybe they are just using bodies now.. at a 11,000 dollars its cheaper for them and at 150 lbs for an avereage person... its and idea at least

    2. Re:a bit cheap by dj245 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Moon Miner's Manifesto has a piece on how the Celestis capsule will only be in orbit for a year before the ashes meet a fiery end and proposes other and similar methods of putting remains in space.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  12. You want to burn in the Sun? by skyhawker · · Score: 5, Funny

    No problem. Just get buried here on earth. Eventually, your wish will be granted. And since you're dead, the wait will be quite bearable. :-)

    --

    The best diplomat I know is a fully activated phaser bank.
    -- Scotty.
    1. Re:You want to burn in the Sun? by polymath69 · · Score: 4, Funny
      No problem. Just get buried here on earth. Eventually, your wish will be granted.

      Exactly. Once the sun goes red-giant, its radius will be far larger than the orbital distance of this little planet. So everyone's bones will eventually wind up toast.

      Worried about global warming? Now that's global warming.

      --

      --
      I don't want to rule the world... I just want to be in charge of mayonnaise.
    2. Re:You want to burn in the Sun? by LauraScudder · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The disappointing thing is that since the sun is ~8.5 light-minutes away, we won't even get to enjoy seeing it explode before we burn to a crisp.

  13. Yay! by cujo_1111 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Instead of having your ashes placed in the ocean or on your favourite piece of land somewhere, you can burn up on re-entry and be spread across the whole planet.

    I don't think the company will be allowed to put you into orbit (it would decay anyway), so they will have to punt you out into deep space or let you burn up. For US$11K I don't think that will cover the cost of ejecting you from the earth's gravity.

    I wonder if I can work this into my life insurance plan?

    --
    If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
  14. Interesting Terminology by calmdude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The phrase that is used is being "buried in space". Quite obviously, one cannot be literally buried in space. What they do is cremate and eject the remains into stellar space.

    I don't remember anyone saying Gene Roddenberry was buried in space....I wonder if he was the first person to voluntarily have his remains ejected into space.

  15. I bet not many people will want to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...burn in Uranus.

    1. Re:I bet not many people will want to... by darnok · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, but Uranus would burn if there were people in it

  16. There were already remains in orbit by TotallyUseless · · Score: 4, Interesting

    LSD Guru Tim Leary, Gene Roddenberry, and 22 others had their remains shot up into orbit in a capsule in 1997. The capsule was supposed to remain in orbit for around 18 months, then burn up on reentry into the atmosphere, for a double cremation!

    --

    Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
    1. Re:There were already remains in orbit by TotallyUseless · · Score: 5, Informative

      Bonus Link: Lists the passengers on that Founder's Flight.

      --

      Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
  17. Awesome by filtur · · Score: 5, Funny

    This would be a great way to test the Missle Defense System. I don't know about anyone else, but personally I wouldn't mind being put to rest in a big explosion at the cost to the U.S. taxpayer.

    1. Re:Awesome by cujo_1111 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You wouldn't be the first, thousands of Japanese have already received this honour.

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
    2. Re:Awesome by moosesocks · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who modded this as funny?

      This is something which most americans need to ponder seriously. Especially when you consider voting a trigger-happy president such as Bush into office.

      If any other country committed such an atrocity against another as the United States did to Japan, we would have World War 3 (it DID cause the cold war, but that's another story). Okay... Japan unsuccessfully attacked a naval base. We nuked two cities without warning, killing thousands.

      Not exactly something that deserves +5 funny.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  18. I'd go ahead and outlaw this guys by JudgeFurious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok, so maybe that's a tad on the draconian side but seriously, do we actually want just anybody tossing trash into orbit for the vanity of people with more money than sense?

    Here's to a very fast bankruptcy for these guys.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  19. A quarter ounce or less... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those imagining yourself in a coffin in space, try again. Only 7 grams (less than 1/4 of an ounce) is sent up in the full version of their "Earthview" service, which involves a craft that projects the ashes out into "orbit" (not exactly one that can be tracked) while the craft itself vaporizes in the atmosphere. A discount version involves only one gram of ashes.

    Other services mention only a "symbolic portion", and its questionable whether they even exist. The only non-"Earthview" activity was purchasing a capsule on a NASA mission that was headed to the moon. I presume their deep space service would be offered the same way...

  20. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by damiam · · Score: 5, Informative

    Cemetaries don't last forever. They can be reused every few hundred years.

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  21. Bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So when Armageddon arrives and all those dead try to rise from their graves while orbiting some far-off celestial body, how's THAT gonna work? It's almost like these guys haven't thought this whole thing through very well.

  22. horrid website by seriv · · Score: 2, Funny

    You would think for 11K a pop, they could hire a web designer with some talent to make a quality website!!

  23. Immortality by digitalhermit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In a few billion years this little wet dustball of ours is going to disappear in a poof of smoke when good old Sol gets middle-aged (insert old fat guy joke here). I want my DNA sent in the other direction. I want my genes to land on some planet (or planets) throughout the galaxy and start new lifecycles. Damn right.

  24. on a serious note... by databeast · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ..I've always thought that space burials are one of the best ways we have a shot at 'meeting' alien races.

    Yes, many of these coffin launches are going to get sucked up into solar gravity wells and burn up, but some are going to get caught in orbits around low-atmosphere bodies or other survivable situations.

    My thinking behind this? the universe isnt *that* old compared to its predicted total lifespan; humankind may indeed be one of the 'first races'. By the time enough life-bearing planets produce that cycle, humanity may already be several hundred million years extinct. But putting our 'relics' (ie our corpses) out into the void, where they may survive fairly intact for far longer (assuming they have the sense to vacuum-pack our corpsicles) we stand a fair chance that something out in the distant future is going to find one of these human relics, and if they havent watched enough sci-fi, probably resurrect the human race from our DNA :-)

    [seriously, blasting your corpse into space probably has more value to it than any current cyrogenics program, as far as the odds of you being resurrected go, the cost of maintenance,[hopefuly none] and value to the human race (lets face it, most of the people going into alcor drums we probably dont want back!)

    Certainly, I'd like to do this, on the condition that the launch params were sufficient to give me a good shot at escaping the sol system limits and not returning to ground as space-trash on one of our neighboring planets.

  25. Keeping up with the Glens' by thecountryofmike · · Score: 2, Funny

    Great, now my neighbors can be better than me even when they die.

  26. These guys will PAY for your space burial! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    These guys are willing to pay up to $10,000,000 of your funeral expenses, provided you get your corpse up there yourself!

  27. The decay bateria are hungry! by orthogonal · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Science seems convinced that in the early universe, only the elements with the lowest atomic weight -- hydrogen, helium, perhaps a few others -- existed.

    Denser elements come into being for millions of years, until the very oldest stars first burnt out, then re-ignited by burning heavy elements, until finally bursting in novas and flinging heavier elements out into the universe.

    After many many such novas, eventually enough of these heavier elements were produced to coalesce and form our sun and its planets. One of the heavier elements -- carbon, some 12 times heavier than fundamental element hydrogen -- conveniently arranges itself into the benzene rings of six atoms that are the scaffold for all Earthly life. It is because of this that Carl Sagan said that we were all made of star-stuff.

    And after all that work of billions of years to collect heavy elements here on Earth, you want to just throw away all that
    oxygen (65%); carbon (18%); hydrogen (10%); nitrogen (3%); calcium (1.5%); phosphorus (1.0%); potassium (0.35%); sulfur (0.25%); sodium (0.15%); magnesium (0.05%); copper, zinc, selenium, molybdenum, fluorine, chlorine, iodine, manganese, cobalt, iron (0.70%); lithium, strontium, aluminum, silicon, lead, vanadium, arsenic, bromine (trace amounts)
    by shooting it into space?

    Learn to recycle, fer cryin' out loud!
    --
    Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
  28. Fraud by Obscenity · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is always the possibility, that your loved ones will not accually be sent up into space. If the company only TOLD you that your loved one got sent up into space, they could easily make a larger profit margin.

    --
    OMG OMG OMG WTF OMG WTF BBQ STFU RTFM, OMFG OMG OMG OMG ROFL LMAO OMG WTF STFU ROFLMAO
  29. Re: story by earthforce_1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually, flying straight the sun is very difficult.

    If you are pushed a hair off course, your remains will go into orbit around the sun, or be blown outward by the solar winds.

    Even if you aim precisely at the sun, the ever increasing pressure of the solar discharge will tend to push you off course and away.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
  30. Whats wrong with good ol underground? by mnmn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So everyone will want to send the whole of themselves (not just the egocentric parts), yet cut costs so embalming, clothing will be out of question.

    Maybe the geosync orbit will be a belt of zombies visible from the ground, from which dead bodies will occasionally whack the windows of the next space station.

    I'd much rather be thrown into the atmosphere, on the night side so people would see a shooting star and make a wish. Hopefully the shooting star will not reach the ground, now that would be messy.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  31. Urban Legend? by Fubar411 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wasn't there an urban legend about an engineer that took some of his buddy's ashes, epoxied them onto a Mars sattelite, and wrote the whole thing anonymously (luckly for me Anonymously is spelled for you in the posting form)?

  32. Sounds like the old Twilight episode by Flexagon · · Score: 2, Informative

    For a few more dollars, you could be embalmed in your favorite fantasy.

  33. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by Snoopy77 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well my granddad never touched alcohol, nor did he beat up on his wife and my family can go and pay their respects at his grave site at any time.

    Reducing him and many others to the equal of garbage is disrespectful to say the least.

    --
    "She's a West Texas girl, just like me" - G.W Bush Iraqis
  34. Rip Off by SisyphusShrugged · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Read the small print, they send a "symbolic portion" of the cremated body, that could be one speck of the ash, that way you can send up an unlimited number of bodies in one go, sounds like a license to print money to me!

    Another rip off is the name a star after you, listed at the bottom as part of the cheaper option, I have researched this name a star after you after hearing it on the radio and thinking about naming one after my girlfriend (she is into cosmology) but after researching it I discovered that all the people do is write the name down in a book that the company has, but the company has no right to name the star (only the International Astronomical Union (IAU) has the right to officially name celestial objects), so all you get is an expensive piece of paper ($50 and up) and here they are charging $300 bucks for that a digital broadcast!!

    Tom: No, actually, Helping Children Through Research And Development is the acronym, Mike. It stands for: Hi, Everyone, Let's Pitch In 'N' Get Cracking Here In Louisiana Doing Right, Eh? Now Then, Hateful, Rich, Overbearing Ugly Guys Hurt Royally Every Time Someone Eats A Radish, Carrot, Hors d'oeuvre, And Never Does Dishes. Eventually, Victor Eats Lunch Over Peoria Mit Ein Neuesberger Tod. .

    --
    Post apocalyptic gaming goodness
  35. Beats eternity in the freezer by Attaturk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Space is infinitely big, right? Well, wrap me up and punt me out there! Surely over infinite time travelling through infinite space, the chances of an alien or future lifeform finding my bits are finite.

    The little green men could restore my body from its DNA and using technologies our sci-fi writers haven't even yet come up with, they could search through spacetime and match it up to the stream of consciousness, which corresponds to my own when I was alive.

    OK so it's not likely. But then again nor is the prospect of a benevolent future human resurrecting you from your frozen head.

    I think the conclusion that we should draw from this is that quite simply the universe doesn't want us to be immortal. The old versions of its component modules need to be deleted and replaced by new releases regularly or it stagnates. But the universe also wants us to want immortality too - that way we strive to achieve the most amazing things within our lifetimes. This, after all, is the only option left to us if we wish to be remembered and therefore achieve the closest thing we can to true immortality.

    I know, I know - the topic is space burial not immortality but let's face it - most of the egomaniac /. readers (myself included naturally) interested in space burial are a hop, skip and a jump away from admitting their craving for eternal life. Actually I think I just want to live to around 25,000 years old so I can see the conclusion of that Microsoft anti-trust story.

  36. I'll beat that price! by Simonetta · · Score: 5, Insightful


    For only $10,000 US (deposited in my Swiss bank account before your transistion to the next world), I will...

    receive your ashes from the cremation facility,

    and...

    Give you a multi-colored ink-jet printed certificate that your ashes will be on the next space-shuttle flight and scattered into low-earth orbit. Where they will cause millions of tiny little twinkles that commemorate your life...

    and...

    Make sure that your ashes (in real life) don't make a big mess in the parking lot behind my apartment.

  37. Burn on the Sun? by FuzzyFurB · · Score: 5, Informative

    Technically if you wait long enough your body will burn on the sun. It is common knowledge that the sun is slowly increasing in size and will eventually (all be it in a LONG time from now) envelope the Earth. If you cryogenically freeze yourself your body won't be destroyed until that day comes. Why pay the extra $ to make it happen now? :)

    --
    Will Stokes Album Shaper http://albumshaper.sf.net
  38. Bah! by Spoing · · Score: 2, Interesting
    1. Isn't this nice, like there is not enough garbage in space already...

    I don't think you understand the scale of things. Space...is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind bogglingly big it is. I mean you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
  39. How do you decompose in space? by read-only · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Anybody know how the human body decays in space?

    Sorry for the gruesome question, but I'm curious.

    1. Re:How do you decompose in space? by El_Ge_Ex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Anybody know how the human body decays in space?

      Actually, the decompression would get you before you had the change to find out. You bones would hold up and maybe some of your muscles. Your other organs wouldn't be so lucky though.

      But hey, at least that part of you that somehow stays together will stay intact for the long haul. The cold of space would freeze it pretty quickly.

      -B

  40. Reminds me of a twilight zone episode... by Phil+John · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...it's Season 1, ep 20, Elegy.

    Astronauts land on a planet with lots of scenes from various periods of history but everyone there seem to be frozen in time, it's actually a great big cemetery planet where the rich have their bodies sent to live out eternity.

    --
    I am NaN
  41. Not ambitious enough by Eric+Smith · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I want to burn in the Sun
    I want to outlive the sun. Maybe in not exactly the same manner as the protagonist of Charles Sheffield's novel "Tomorrow and Tomorrow", though.

    Or maybe burning in the sun wouldn't be so bad. There was another novel whose author and title I can't recall at the moment, in which one of the characters was a human transformed into an entity that could in fact survive in the sun. She discovered that there were intelligent creatures living there that were taking actions apparently designed to shorten the sun's life.

  42. How about composting? by gmby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think we all need to be cut into litle pieces and put in the garden (not the food one?). This matter I'm made of is just barrowd; it's not mine, it belongs to the earth. unfortunaly it's not leagle in most countries. I hate to breath others smoke/dust (in the wind)/ash (to ashes) stuff. Keep the air clean, compost your loved ones!

    And; No, put in a pine box after being pickeled is not the same!

    --
    I don't want a pickle; I just want a Motor-Cycle! A four foot cop arrived with a five foot gun!
  43. Gene Roddenberry was already 'buried' in space by jebiester · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This was already done for Gene Roddenberry (Star Trek founder) in 1997. Just a shame the ashes weren't brought up in the Enterprise.

    There's a old CNN article on it here

  44. Life on other planets?... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Years from now, i can see a space rover, digging up bodies on venus thinking "holy god, there was life here once"...

  45. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by kirkjobsluder · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is true, a lot of the really old cemetaries in Europe reuse graves ever few generations. The United States has not been around quite long enough to require charnel houses (where bones are stacked to make way for new graves) except in New Orleans where the the previous occupant was pushed to the back of the crypt.

  46. Temporary Vanity by KarmaOverDogma · · Score: 2, Insightful

    as these orbits will evetually decay and they'll be ashes-to-ashes, dust-to-dust anyway.

    --
    uR iGn0ranc3, Their Power
  47. Just Drop Into the Sun from Sail Ship by Mad+Man · · Score: 4, Interesting
    was Re: Story
    Actually, flying straight the sun is very difficult.
    If you are pushed a hair off course, your remains will go into orbit around the sun, or be blown outward by the solar winds.
    Even if you aim precisely at the sun, the ever increasing pressure of the solar discharge will tend to push you off course and away.


    So don't push the body into the sun from orbit.

    Do it from a solar sail craft that is hovering over the sun (from a point where light pressure is balanced between gravitational pull), and just drop the body in.

    As far as I know, the idea belongs to Bob L. Forward. That's how one of the characters is "buried" at the end of his novel Flight of the Dragonfly (which was later re-published in bloated form as Rocheworld; get the original).

    Since the light sail craft was not in orbit, there was no forward component of motion. Thus, when released from the craft, the body was not in orbit either. The only force acting on the body was the gravitational pull of the star.
    1. Re:Just Drop Into the Sun from Sail Ship by LauraScudder · · Score: 3, Informative

      The fact of the matter is that from Earth it's much more economical to eject things out of the solar system than into the sun, which is really counter-intuitive. Since most people we know of would ultimately be starting the journey at Earth, it doesn't particularly matter how they manage that last drop into the sun, you still have to ditch all your angular momentum, which takes loads of energy.

    2. Re:Just Drop Into the Sun from Sail Ship by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Funny
      Do it from a solar sail craft that is hovering over the sun (from a point where light pressure is balanced between gravitational pull), and just drop the body in.

      Or just drop the whole thing in, sails and all, and call it a modern day Viking funeral ;)

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  48. I prefer this Sweedish method by WormholeFiend · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3473103.stm

    Swedes offer freeze-dry burials
    The environmentally-conscientious could soon ensure they don't end up polluting the earth after they die, thanks to a company in Sweden.
    Concerns about the environmental impact of embalming fluids or cremation have led Promessa Organic to come up with a chilling alternative.

    Their method involves freeze-drying the corpse in liquid nitrogen.

    Sound vibrations then shatter the brittle remains into a powder that can be "returned to the ecological cycle".

    Biologist and head of Promessa Organic Susanne Wiigh-Maesak said she hoped to promote environmental and existential awareness.

    "Our ecological burial reduces environmental impact on some of our most important resources; our water, air and soil," she explains on her company website.

    "At the same time it provides us with deeper insights regarding the ecological cycle, and greater understanding of and respect for life on earth."

    Compost

    After the freezing process, the odourless powdery remains are laid in a coffin made of corn starch and buried in a shallow grave.

    Ms Wiigh-Maesak says the soil "turns the coffin and its contents into compost in about six months" which means relatives can then plant a bush or tree on the spot.

    The method is based upon preserving the body in a biological form after death, while avoiding harmful embalming fluid
    Susanne Wiigh-Maesak,
    Promessa Organic

    "The compost formed can then be taken up by the plant... The plant stands as a symbol of the person, and we understand where the body went," she said.
    Ms Wiigh-Maesak says she would very much like to become a white rhododendron.

    The company has applied for a patent on her method in 35 countries.

    Ms Wiigh-Maesak said the authorities in Joenkoeping, 328 km (204 miles) south-west of Stockholm, were ready to start operating its first freeze-drying facility in the next couple of years.

    The head of cemetery administration in Joenkoeping said younger people were keen on the idea as "green burials" are becoming popular in Sweden.

    1. Re:I prefer this Sweedish method by Alan+Hicks · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Concerns about the environmental impact of embalming fluids or cremation have led Promessa Organic to come up with a chilling alternative.

      Why don't they just do what I plan to do?

      Decompose.

      --
      Slackware, what else when it must be secure, stable, and easy?
  49. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by swordsaintzero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So alcholics are garbage and by inference are on par with wife beating scum, because they have a genetic predisposition towards a drinking problem? I have to say of all the stupid things typed in haste and posted on slashdot you sir have entered into the hall of fame of fuckups.

    --
    Panel F, Relay #70
  50. Yes and no by roystgnr · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is the part you got right:

    Actually, flying straight the sun is very difficult.

    Yes, it is: to go into an orbit that will intersect the sun you have to kill nearly all your current velocity with respect to the sun. IIRC for the Earth that's about 25 miles per second (plus a bit extra to get you out of Earth's gravity well), which is more than three times as fast this "put your ashes in orbit" mission.

    This is the part you just made up:

    If you are pushed a hair off course, your remains will go into orbit around the sun, or be blown outward by the solar winds.

    There is a reason why light-sail designs call for square miles of material thinner than paper: because unless you've got that much surface area to weight, neither sunlight nor solar wind will change your course very much.

    Even if you aim precisely at the sun, the ever increasing pressure of the solar discharge will tend to push you off course and away.

    That pressure will increase with the inverse square of your distance from the sun, as does the force of gravity pulling you towards the sun. If you were on course to begin with, you won't be blown off it, certainly not enough to miss a million mile wide target.

    1. Re:Yes and no by roystgnr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Plus, you don't need extra speed to get you out of Earth's gravity well. Even if you travel at only one meter per second away from the Earth, you will still eventually get outside its gravity well. You only need to reach escape velocity if you plan to reach a velocity and then coast from there on out.

      If you travel at only one meter per second away from the Earth, gravity will smack you back into the Earth shortly thereafter, unless you're under constant acceleration (which requires extra deltaV, which I loosely called "extra speed"). If you travel at 25 miles per second away from the Earth under no acceleration, you will of course eventually get out of its gravity well, but by the time you do you will have slowed down slightly.

      Second of all, there is a much easier way. You just aim yourself at a planet and slingshot yourself off it to gain some pretty good speed. Then, you fly by another planet and use its gravity well not to change the magnitude of your velocity (although you'll do that too), but to change the direction you're travelling. If you do this right, you can be going straight towards the Sun at a very high rate of speed and with no component of your velocity that is perpendicular to the line between you and the Sun.

      You're right; I stand corrected. The guy who replied to you and said You don't gain energy (or velocity) by slingshotting off another planet. The energy you gain going in is the same as the energy 'given back' when you go out. wasn't thinking about different frames of reference: in the frame of reference of the planet you pass your energy is unchanged, but in the frame of reference of the Sun you've gained or lost energy: if your new velocity minus your old velocity is in the direction the planet is orbiting, then some of the planets' momentum is transferred to you; if the opposite is true then some of your momentum is transferred to the planet.

      There's a limit to how tight a turn you could make around any particular planet, so I'm not sure if you could kill all your radial velocity from a Hohmann orbit to Venus (or even if you could kill enough to send you to Mercury and from there into the Sun), but you could definitely swing around Jupiter straight into the Sun, and that's at least more fuel-efficient than the direct flight I was assuming.

    2. Re:Yes and no by wowbagger · · Score: 2, Informative

      The energy required to achieve escape velocity is the same as going one meter per second. If you're going one m/s, you need to fight the pull of gravity, but if you're going escape velocity you're speed would exactly compensate for gravity.

      IANAP (physicist), but I will be in two years.

      Not if you keep making mistakes like that. Escape velocity is defined as the velocity needed to escape from a gravity well with no additional energy input. True, IF I move a meter per second radially away from the earth, and IF I continue to apply force to overcome gravity, THEN I will escape from the earth (in the limit), HOWEVER that is not "escape velocity" since I am continuing to oppose the force of gravity.

      However, IF I want to take a "running start" at it, and then coast, I need to be moving at roughly 7 miles per second to have enough kinetic energy to be able to convert it to the potential energy of being "infinitely far" from the earth (escape conditions).

      --
      www.eFax.com are spammers
  51. Am I the only one... by darnok · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...wondering how a person can be *buried* in *space*?

    Do mourners get to sprinkle a bit of space on the "grave"?

  52. Howstuffworks Entry on Space Burials by oobob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I first read about this in Newsweek a few years ago. Tim Leary and Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry (I assume that's redundant here) already blasted off, as have a handful of others, including Princeton University physicist Gerard O'Neill, and SEDS and ISU co-founder Todd Hawley. The article describes a 2001 mission:

    "For the Encounter 2001 mission, Celestis will place cremated remains into personalized flight capsules that can hold approximately one-quarter ounce (7 grams) of ashes. They will then load these capsules into a canister attached to the upper stage engine. The Encounter 2001 will initially travel into Earth's geosynchronous transfer orbit, an orbit primarily used by communications satellites. When the craft reaches the optimal point in its orbit, ground control will send a command to fire the spacecraft's solid-fuel rocket motor, propelling the spacecraft towards Jupiter. About two years later, the tiny spaceship will fly by Jupiter, using the planet's gravity to propel itself outside the solar system."

    Given that a typical funeral costs around $7,000, the price doesn't seem too steep. Save a little more, skip the visitation, and get yourself a rocket.

    -Oobob

  53. Visible from Earth by sielwolf · · Score: 2, Funny

    Screw shooting me into the Sun, shoot me to the moon on the non-Dark Side. That way generations of my progeny can look up on a starless night and see my cold grimacing corpse smiling down on them.

    Yes!

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
  54. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by Joel+Carr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well I'm going to bite.

    It would appear that you have never had a friend die. Or if you have, you didn't have too much respect or emotional attachment to that person.

    To refer to buried human remains simply as 'garbage' is an unbelievably shallow comment. Yes when it comes down to the bare basics, buried people are dead. They aren't going to earn another pay cheque. They won't be at their desk helping the economy steam on. But that does not mean they are worthless or worthy of being equated to 'garbage'.

    Cemeteries are a place for people to return to after losing a loved one. They are a place that helps people overcome grief and loss, by allowing them to return to the resting place of a loved one and pay their final respects. The vary fact that you can be present at the place a friends body is buried can mean a great deal emotionally.

    Cemeteries are a way of honouring the dead. Some of us believe that human life is valuable and should be respected, even after death. For some people, cemeteries are the best way for them to do that.

    Also cemeteries can serve as a reminder of the past. In a cemetery where one of my friends is buried there are many white crosses marking the graves of soldiers whos bodies were brought home. There is a message there that should never be forgotten.

    ---

    --
    Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves. -- AE
  55. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by SaV · · Score: 3, Interesting

    actually, being a student of anthropology/archaeology has made me want to be cremated even more. i don't want my body dug up in a couple hundred years to be studied!

  56. Hey, why not be immortalized before your time? by Marvelicious · · Score: 3, Funny
    "For those imagining yourself in a coffin in space, try again. Only 7 grams (less than 1/4 of an ounce) is sent up in the full version of their "Earthview" service, which involves a craft that projects the ashes out into "orbit" (not exactly one that can be tracked) while the craft itself vaporizes in the atmosphere. A discount version involves only one gram of ashes."
    So, the way I see it, I can save 7 grams worth of pubic hair and toenail clippings and send it into space with this outfit and live on in the stars while I'm still here! Not to mention already living on in the city sewer, my girlfriends sheets, etc...
    --
    Send whiskey and fresh horses!
  57. The Loved One by SmoothTom · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Why was my first thought the 1965 movie (with "Something to Offend Everyone!") The Loved One?

    Maybe it was the business with launching dead pets into space for burial, or maybe Aimee Thanatogenos taking that ride, eh?

    Hmmmm. I'll have to find a copy of that movie somewhere. Haven't seen it for years.

  58. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by Have+Blue · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Your house/apartment/whatever is taking up far more space than a single grave. I can think of a few ways to improve this situation.

  59. Learn yourselfs some Fizix boys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    If an object is orbiting, all objects, no matter how small that are on it are orbiting independently as well, hence you would have to be propelled very rapidly TOWARDS the sun to counteract orbit velocity and burn.

  60. Space Pollution by Alien54 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Before long, someone will oppose this as an example of polluting known space.

    or polluting the Sun, conjuring up images of canisters scattered across the solar surface.

    ;)

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:Space Pollution by nizo · · Score: 2, Funny
      like there is not enough garbage in space already...

      Oh my God, if we are not careful we could fill all of space with our trash!!! I better hurry and get a bumper sticker for my gas guzzling SUV to express my outrage!

      --
      I Am My Own Worst Enemy
  61. Trash in space by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Trash in space is going to become a much more serious issue once spacetravel becomes commercialized.

    If anybody is interested in an anime which deals with this issue, I HIGHLY recommend Planet ES. It deals with a salaryman in space who works as a space debris collector (futuristic garbageman). Apparently space trash is a HUGE problem in the series, and even a tiny screw floating out in space can kill if its moving fast enough. Very interesting. I wonder how closely our future will mirror this.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:Trash in space by TheLoneDanger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The anime is okay, but the manga is MUCH better than the anime for realism. It's set in the near future and is much more plausible with more actual science and understanding of what really living in space entails. It has almost singlehandedly (along with the Firefly DVDs) got me longing again for true space travel.

      The manga PLANETES is a love letter to space travel. If you love space give the manga a shot.

      --

      "But I trust in the people's capacity for reflection, rage and rebellion." -Oscar Olivera
  62. i have a space venture right here by WormholeFiend · · Score: 2, Funny

    for 20$ only, I'll send a few grams of your ashes up in an Estes(http://www.estesrockets.com) powered rocket

  63. wait a few years by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I want to burn in the Sun (or at least the egomaniacal part of me.)"

    You can do that for free, just wait about 5 billion years.

    --
    500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
  64. Obligatory Futurama quote: by MalikChen · · Score: 2, Funny

    Reminds me of a Futurama quote, where the crew went to Fry's ancestor's grave in the sky.

    "The closest to heaven they'll get..."

  65. Your easy answer is, alas, too easy. by rjh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it DID cause the cold war

    More accurately, it kept the Cold War from becoming hot. The Cold War was going to happen regardless of whether we dropped a nuke or Martha Stewart on Hiroshima. The US and the USSR were (are) both ideologically expansionist powers, in that each wanted to see its ideology adopted by the rest of the world. When two expansionist powers come into conflict, there's going to be a cold war and most likely followed by a very hot one. Unless, of course, both sides know that a hot war would be a literal hell on earth, thus giving both sides a strong incentive to not start a hot war.

    Did we come close to nuclear war in the Cuba embargo? Damn straight. Why didn't we exchange nukes? Because both sides were reluctant to.

    For the first time in the history of the world, we've invented a weapon which has not been used for over fifty years. That has never happened before.

    I actually rather like the Bomb. It's a simple, one-question choice: are we as human beings morally developed enough to be allowed to continue existing?

    It's a one-question exam, scored pass or fail. So far, humanity has made the right choice. I think that's rather hopeful, myself.

    If any other country committed such an atrocity against another as the United States did to Japan, we would have World War 3

    I see. So we could either kill 250,000 Japanese (and several thousand Korean slave workers who were in Hiroshima when the Bomb hit, and several thousands of other nationalities, too) in two attacks so terrible, so catastrophic, so Wrath of God, that the Japanese surrendered... or we could go forward with Operation Olympic and kill millions of Japanese and millions of Americans.

    After the Nagasaki bomb hit, the Emperor was willing to surrender. Do you know what his aides' response to this was? They tried to murder him so that he wouldn't be able to surrender; and without an Emperor who could sign a surrender, it would've condemned Japan to decades of warfare. That's how hardcore, how serious, the Japanese generals, warmongers and militarists were: they wanted the world to end.

    By nuking two cities, the United States forced a surrender.

    Was dropping The Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki a war crime? I don't know. I genuinely don't know. No matter what arguments you make for it being a war crime, there are powerful and compelling arguments that not dropping The Bomb would have been a greater crime. And no matter what arguments you make in defense of The Bomb, you cannot argue away 250,000-plus people wiped out in an instant, their shadows etched onto the sides of buildings.

    I have no answers. I only appreciate the spectacular difficulty of the question. That you have found easy answers strongly suggests to me that you have no appreciation of the question.

    In the end, humanity is advanced more by people who have no answers than by people who have answers without understanding the questions.

    1. Re:Your easy answer is, alas, too easy. by rjh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given our other option was Operation Olympic, which would've resulted in (conservative estimate) five times as many dead? Yes, I think a case can be made that not dropping The Bomb would have been a war crime.

      Under the Geneva Accords, a nation is obligated to conduct war in such a manner as to minimize the depradations, casualties, loss of life and property damage to non-military targets. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were apocalyptic attacks, yes. Olympic would have been worse.

      So by that metric--if we had a choice which would have left Hiroshima and Nagasaki as flaming cinders, but the rest of the mainland mostly untouched, or a choice to do a mass invasion which would have left the entire island chain aflame and smoking, it would be a war crime to not choose the atomic option.

      In the general case, of course it makes no sense to say "not dropping a nuke is a war crime". It's absurd. Balderdash. Ludicrous insanity.

      But in the context of "our options are drop a nuke or else kick off Operation Olympic"... not dropping a nuke (i.e., going the Olympic route) could be viewed as a war crime.

      It's a spectacularly difficult question.

    2. Re:Your easy answer is, alas, too easy. by miu · · Score: 2, Insightful
      By nuking two cities, the United States forced a surrender.

      In the 19th century civilian population centers and industry had become such an important part of a nation's ability to wage war that they were viewed as valid military targets. Some people use this belief as an argument that nuking those cities was okay. That still leaves the question of why we could not have selected a pure military site to nuke - the damage caused would not have been as great, but Japan would have been able to see what sort of weapons we had available.

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
    3. Re:Your easy answer is, alas, too easy. by Ggreg · · Score: 2, Informative
      By nuking two cities, the United States forced a surrender.

      I'm amazed no one has posted a challenge to this assertion. Few historians accept this justification of history's worst act of terror uncritically. The Japanese were trying to surrender anyway.

      This article is a good starting point for anyone interested in the facts of the matter.

  66. Re:Cemeteries are landfills by damiam · · Score: 3, Interesting
    To refer to buried human remains simply as 'garbage' is an unbelievably shallow comment. Yes when it comes down to the bare basics, buried people are dead. They aren't going to earn another pay cheque. They won't be at their desk helping the economy steam on. But that does not mean they are worthless or worthy of being equated to 'garbage'.

    The people are not worthless. But their bodies are. You aren't (normally) attached to the bodies of your friends and families, you're attached to their minds and souls. No matter what you do with the body, whether you burn it or bury it, the soul is not around any more. The body is just a bit of decomposing matter. Ecologically speaking, it's garbage.

    I would rather have my ashes scattered in a place that I loved, so that my family could remember me every time they were there, and so that my body would go back into the nature environment and nurture new life. I'd rather go out in a burst of flame than slowly be eaten away by worms over the decades.

    Many cultures manage to do quite well without cemetaries - Japan has a 97% cremation rate. While I respect the right of people to dispose of their bodies as they see fit, I believe that the US would be better off if we did the same.

    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  67. Mars landing by dialsoft · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think that it would be great to be buried in space with a trajectory towards a planet that one day you will be either discovered there or your dna or whatever part of your decomposed body could contribute to the evolution of life on that planet in 22342342 million years.

    rock on

  68. You've missed the point. by abiggerhammer · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Which is: is it worse to kill 250,000 in an instant to prevent the possibility of millions more being slaughtered over the course of months, or to save those 250,000 at the cost of a long, slow, brutal war?

    I don't have a good answer for that, myself. I don't have any answer.

    --
    Dance like nobody's watching. Sing like you're in the shower. Fuck like you're being filmed.
  69. Part? by AvengerXP · · Score: 2, Funny

    "I want to burn in the Sun (or at least the egomaniacal part of me.)"

    Oh i guarantee you will burn in your wholesome completeness sir. Not just that Egomaniacal part. In fact, you won't even get there you'll burn much much sooner.

    --
    Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
  70. Panspermia problems? by penguinland · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So here's a question: Let's say that this company launches someone's remains into orbit. 200 years later, we discover what appears to be burned organic matter floating through our solar system. How do we know if it's from this company? How do we know if it came from another planet that could have life on it? This is the same sort of reasoning that led us to crash the Galileo probe into Jupiter: so we don't contaminate other parts of space with terrestrial stuff. IMHO, this company is not thinking ahead, and making a huge mistake. What do others think (preferably others who know more about this than I do)?

    --
    "Flying is the art of throwing yourself at the ground and missing." - Douglas Adams
  71. PlanetES by Hecatonchires · · Score: 2

    Anime about trash collectors in space. Set in the future (of course). In one episode they have to bring in a coffin - it used to be fashionable to be buried in space, but now it's illegal and a hazard.

    Good show.

    --

    Yay me!

  72. burial of heroes by Kris_J · · Score: 2

    I want to be atomised by that whooshy thing the stargate does when a wormhole forms. :)

  73. $50K gets you cryonics & possible future revi by Cryofan · · Score: 2, Funny

    You can sign up with www.Alcor.org for a cryonics contract for only 50K (fundable through life insurance payments) and get a chance at a future revival.

    And if revived in the distant future, you can ride in a spaceship and look out the window at all those 100K space caskets roaming around space.

    Myself, I prefer a chance at life to a certain death....

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
  74. Worrying about "space garbage"? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2, Funny

    As long as someone is worrying about "space garbage", there are a few galaxies we need moved. They are blocking the view in that direction.

  75. Meteor Shower by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Informative

    If they dump your body low enough, it will eventually re-enter the atmosphere and burn up, creating meteor showers. That way it won't become permanent space junk.

    Little kids would then sing songs like, "Twinkle Twinkle Grandpa Jones, Watch The Sky Burn His Bones....."

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  76. slingshot... by imsabbel · · Score: 2, Informative

    You CAN gain velocity AND energy by doing a slingshot around a planet (But you need a 3 body system, so a slingshot around the sun wouldnt increase your speed...)
    Sadly, to prove it, you need a lot of calculations in center of mass systems, ect. (Was the nastiest stuff in the "newton"-part of theoretical physics I, lagrange was much more easy).

    In end effect, you can reduce the kinetic energy of the planet on its way around the sun and transfer it to yourself by placing yourself in a "low part" of the combined cravitational and ratational potential behind the planet in its rotation.
    While you are there (during the slingshot), you are "pulled" by the planet and gain speed (and the correct integreation shows that there is a net gain)

    --
    HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    1. Re:slingshot... by AeroIllini · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your bit about gaining velocity by slingshotting around a planet is spot on. The orbital energy you gain is the same as the orbital energy the planet loses, but since the planet is so massive, it's velocity hardly changes at all (Kinetic energy is one-half the mass times the velocity squared ... and the planet's mass certainly doesn't change during the manouver).

      Flybys work like this: The planet you are approaching is orbiting the sun at some velocity (about 30 km/s for the Earth). As you approach, you enter the planet's "sphere of influence," meaning the distance at which the effect of the planet's gravity on you is stronger than the effect of the Sun's gravity. Your velocity when you enter the SOI determines the curve of the hyperbolic orbit around the planet. You fly around the planet and exit the SOI at a different angle than when you started. Your exit velocity will be the sum of your hyperbolic velocity (with respect to the planet) and the planet's velocity (with respect to the Sun). Picture throwing a ball off a moving train, and measuring the speed of that ball from the ground, not moving. Throw the ball forward at speed x with respect to the train, and it's moving faster than the train with respect to the ground, and vice versa. You can tailor your exit and entry angles as to adjust your overall velocity (since entry and exit velocity with respect to the planet are both the same).

      Of course, the same thing happens around the sun, but since we never leave the Sun's SOI (with the possible exception of deep space probes) we can't adjust our velocity with respect to it. In other words, in order for a spacecraft to "slingshot around the Sun" it would have to have started on an orbit around the center of the Galaxy and entered the Sun's SOI, nearly perpendicular to the Sun's galactic orbit, and exit the Sun's SOI moving forward along the Sun's galactic orbit.

      All of the above assumes a completely unpowered orbital trajectory. If the spacecraft were to fire engines at any point, the story would change dramatically.

      By the way, I'm an Aerospace Engineering graduate student with experience in orbital mechanics courses.

      --
      For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
  77. How about diamonds... by Fiz+Ocelot · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cremation diamonds http://www.cio.com/archive/010103/18.html Yes, now you can wear your loved one on your finger, or pawn them off!

  78. burn in the Sun by benjonson · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I want to burn in the Sun...
    OK, you can moderate this off-topic, but I just want to get this off my chest: why not shoot nuclear waste into the sun? Permanent disposal. Obviously it would have to be put in containers that were disaster proof. But it would get rid of the stuff once and for all and so remove the final (strong) argument against nuclear power.
    --
    =-+
  79. what if? by Tellarin · · Score: 2, Interesting


    what if one of these bodys manage to get to the surface of a non-habiteted planet? wouldn't that "contaminate" the planet?

    and what if this body reaches a planet with simple life forms, probably the bordy will have some bacteria or virii, that could be a big hazard to native life

    --
    -- SouNerd.com
  80. Ashes to Ashes... by Systems+Curmudgeon · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ashes to Ashes, Earth to Berth, Dust to Distance.

  81. Collisions? by TonyMeatballs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not that it seems like a huge problem, sending a few bodies into earth orbit, but does this company actually monitor, or know exactly where in earth orbit these bodies are going? I can imagine the headlines one day when a spaceshuttle has a hit-and-run with a body in orbit nobody expected to be there