Personalized Moon Crash

Ich Bin Zu writes "Do you want to create your own crater on the moon? CNN has an article about a company putting a personalized moon crash for sale on ebay. The bid opens with $6 million which will enable the highest bidder to stuff up to 10kg worth of stuff on a space craft and lob it to the moon. The condition of the cargo is not guaranteed as it crashes on the moon at 4000 mph."

Comments

Not guaranteed?

[larien]

I think we can safely guarantee the condition of just about any cargo which hits the moon at that speed...

Re:Not guaranteed?

[Anonymous Coward]

... fucked

Re:Not guaranteed?

[zephc]

I want it to say CHAIR on the moon, visible from earth! But if they mess it up and it just says, for instance, CHA, I want my money back!

Re:Not guaranteed?

[andalay]

I would want mine to be an outline of goatse. That way, he would be known throughout ALL the world

This is a case in which being an AC would be better for you.

fp?

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Could it be?

I want to send my mother in law to the moon...

RS

Re:fp?

[ScottGant]

I want to send my ex-wife Alice to the moon...

Zoom boom to the moon Alice...TO THE MOON!

Re:fp?

[Lifewish]

I have a sister who I'm willing to send anywhere, the further the better. Unfortunately I have no idea if she'd fit in the containers. Would it be acceptable to split her into many sections and send each separately? I'm sure she'd enjoy it really...

Redneck

[BWJones]

Boy, how redneck can you get?

"Hey Bubba, I know what let's do! Lets go throw sh*t at the moon and see if we can make craters. Yeah, that's cool Zeek. heh, heh, heh."

Seriously though, where is the science in this? They claim to want to take pictures, but they are pictures of the near side of the moon, of which we have plenty. And, unless you wanted to bury your cremains on the surface of the moon, this is the same kind of thing you find when you go hiking in the desert or mountains and find cans and things that people have shot at and left to rust or names carved into trees or rocks saying "Steve was here".

I am usually a strong supporter of science related work and space exploration, but this seems.....well?......What's the point?

Condition of the cargo cannot be guaranteed after the 4,000 mph impact, Orbital Development explains, although the cargo is contained within a special burst-resistant canister.

P.S., what is the point of using a "burst resistant container" if you are going to be aiming your "object" for a 4000 MPH impact with the moon? I am currently unaware of any container system weighing more than .00001 grams or so that is capable of withstanding an impact of that speed. Marketing gone awry.

Re:Redneck

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the redneck version of "moon crash" would have an entirely different meaning: "If we're all hanging our asses out the windows, who's driving?"

Re:Redneck

[s20451]

Thanks for posting the first "bah, humbug" post. I'll take my shot at the first "Jane, you ignorant slut" post.

You don't have to take visible-light pictures only. You could do something else cool, like bombard the surface with neutrons, looking for hydrogen (= water).

Actually, if you put pretty much any vehicle in the vicinity of the moon, you will probably find a scientist who will want to do an interesting experiment with it. Scientists are ingenious that way.

There was also a story not long ago about an effort to deliberately crash things into the moon to liberate clouds of debris, which could be analyzed by ground instruments. In that case the useful payload could be nothing but bricks.

And a "burst resistant container" may be useful if you want to do science in the millisecond that the probe has to survive on the surface. Seriously! A recent Mars mission had a couple of probes that were supposed to work this way (they failed).

Re:Redneck

[MoonBuggy]

What's the point?

The purchaser gets the chance to be part of the design and testing of the spacecraft before launching whatever onto the surface. I sure as hell know I'd pay a fair amount for the chance to be involved in something that interesting. I'm sure I could think of something useful to put there by the end of the construction process too :-)

Re:Redneck

[Gleng]

No science, just commercial space travel. Yes, smashing crap into the moon is completely without merit, but to me it's exciting that it's even possible for someone with the $6M cash and no experience in rocketry to think "Hmm...I think I'll throw something at the moon today."

Go for it, guys. Run pointless, self serving commercial space launches. Make it cheap.

There really isn't *too* much of a stretch of imagination between this, and a University landing a portable, robotic observatory on the moon for $500,000.

Re:Redneck

[flossie]

I sure as hell know I'd pay a fair amount for the chance to be involved in something that interesting.

"Interesting" jobs like that only stay interesting until you are paid to do them. When you get down to the actual work, there is little difference between designing a spacecraft, an aircraft, a car or an engine component. As the complexity of the overall object rises, the amount of impact any one person makes on the project reduces accordingly. Of course, that doesn't stop it being fun to talk about the time you used to work on project X.

Re:Redneck

[Hogwash McFly]

Why does everything have to be in the name of SCIENCE? Or is it just because it's to do with space they automatically have to be looking for new elements or finding a lunar cure for cancer? I think playing computer games is 'cool' and I am very well aware that when I'm fragging a few people online I'm not bettering the human race.

However, your concern about pollution is a valid one and I agree that it would suck if we made the moon into a wastepaper basket and chucked random shit at it. That said, it would be kinda cool to be the first person ever to be 'buried' (not literally, unless you were Verne Troyer you'd be too heavy for the cargo weight limit) outside of Earth. Quick, get grandma's ashes!

Re:Redneck

[cybermace5]

And a "burst resistant container" may be useful if you want to do science in the millisecond that the probe has to survive on the surface. Seriously! A recent Mars mission had a couple of probes that were supposed to work this way (they failed).

Beagle II?

Re:Redneck

[another_henry]

It would be kinda cool to be the first person ever to be 'buried' (not literally, unless you were Verne Troyer you'd be too heavy for the cargo weight limit) outside of Earth.

Sorry, someone's beaten you to it - Gene Shoemaker, of comet fame.

Shortly before Professor Shoemaker died he said, "Not going to the Moon and banging on it with my own hammer has been the biggest disappointment in life."

Well, he sort of got his wish. I'm not certain he's the first but haven't heard of anyone before him.

Re:Redneck

[Jim Starx]

Things wouldn't decompose on the moon.

Re:Redneck

[mcrbids]

I think playing computer games is 'cool' and I am very well aware that when I'm fragging a few people online I'm not bettering the human race.

Yeah, but do you have fun when you're fragging?

Fun between you and a few others improves the quality of life for you and those few others - and that's bettering the human race, too.

Why not charge $10 million...

[bc90021]

...and add some brakes? I'm sure there'd be takers for the opportunity to put a telescope on the moon, instead of just crashing something into it.

imagine

[whiteranger99x]

Imagine if people could so that repeatedly to spell something...like chairface did with that laser on the Tick :D

Re:imagine

[Hogwash McFly]

Imagine if people could so that repeatedly to spell something...like chairface did with that laser on the Tick :D

As long as you're not in charge, sure! :P

#1 bidder is...

[Stiletto]

Hmm... the #1 bidder, someone named GWBush2004, lives in Yucca mountain, and has 77,000 tons of something he wants to get rid of.....

10KG of water

[Anonymous Coward]

That ought to be enough to annoy all the scientists measuring micro traces for life.

Re:10KG of water

[erobertstad]

I'd like to send a 10kg rubber ball, lets see how far that fucker bounces. :)

Re:10KG of water

[zeath]

That was by far the funniest post I've read on slashdot in a while. Until, of course, I started to think about it scientifically. (which I tend to do with all jokes eventually).

Unfortunately, with the lack of pressure, the water would instantly vaporize as soon as it got a glimpse of sunlight, and any debris ejected from a collision at that speed will likely not return to the moon's surface due to the low gravity. I doubt it would have any long-term impact on traces for microbial life, with the exception of ejecting any native microbes off the moon during impact.

Put Bush on a diet!

[jackbird]

Is that 22 lbs. as measured on Earth or on the Moon?

'Cuz I bet GWB could slim down to 132 if he really tried. Don't think it's gonna happen for Cheney, though.

Re:Put Bush on a diet!

[MagPulse]

The kilogram is a measure of mass, not weight, and therefore does not rely on the force of gravity.

Better than being cremated

[toygeek]

Hey if you're gonna die soon (no I'm no trying to be morbid) and you have wishes to be cremated, why not do it this way? You'd be "craterated". Or just have your ashes sent up. "Yep, my dear old Dad, he's moon dust by now..."

Re:Better than being cremated

[Bob9113]

Hey if you're gonna die soon (no I'm no trying to be morbid) and you have wishes to be cremated, why not do it this way?

I was thinking the same thing, but the cost is prohibitive. Apparently cremated human remains weigh between 4 and 10 pounds, meaning you could only get about 3 people in the capsule. $2 million a pop isn't the right price.

Of course, there may be more than just carbon left after the mere 1500 degrees in a standard crematorium. If a serious industrial incinerator could get the weight down to around one third of a pound (doubtful, we are carbon based after all), then it'd be a goer - $100,000 is definitely within the reach of 60 people within the 15 month delay till it flies.

Of course, the families would want insurance, and that'd jack the price back up. Maybe you shoot for .2 pounds and 100 participants.

Re:Better than being cremated

[Xzzy]

They could submit the ashes to that company that turns said ashes into diamonds.. they're quite small, and I presume, light.

That process costs from $2500 to $14k. If a 0.5 carat stone only weighs 0.1 grams (according to google), you could fit a whole bunch of those stones into the capsule.

So not only do you get to spend eternity as a diamond, you get to do it on the moon. ;)

Send a Black Obelisk

[g0rath]

or maybe just a troupe of monkeys...

Sure, it *seems* like a good idea...

[physicsphairy]

until the moon people launch a full-scale retaliatory strike.

Star Jones

[whiteranger99x]

What would happen if we lobbed Star Jones towards the moon at 4000MPH? Would it shatter? Fwahahahaha! >:D

Toner.

[Zzootnik]

Hmmm...How about 10 Kg of custom mixed Toner. I'm thinking red or maybe green... I suppose it would look like a paintball target...

For $24,000

[BillsPetMonkey]

You can get a sidewinder missile lobbed at a Fallujahn mosque much closer to home ....

(I have karma to burn and a conscience to clear)

Re:For $24,000

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would anyone shoot a air-to-air missle at a building. If you're going to make gratuitous slams on the military at least know what you're talking about.

Re:For $24,000

[RobinH]

What's the point in knowing what they're talking about. Dubya doesn't.

In Texas we... um... well, you see in Texas we have a saying... maybe you have a saying here too, but we have this saying, if you shoot a sidewider missile at a mosque, and two guys come running out on fire, then you just killed two arabs with... that is... two bad guys, you know, because they're bad... anyway, you get two guys with one sidewinder missile. That's what we say in Texas. Do you say that here too? :-)

Great news for all of us...

[Justifiable_Delusion]

Now we don't even have to wait to get to a planet to piss away its surface with polution and shit we don't need. Now we can charge obscene amounts of money and do it...w00t!

One a secondary note...if you were really worried about your legacy standing the surface of earth in 100 years after we finish with this planet then you could potentially safely store a whole bunch of things...DNA, booze, *nix admin bible...

Link to Auction

[BrianGa]

Auction is at http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&cate gory=45046&item=3808751242&rd=1

Re:Link to Auction

[BrianGa]

Project Link is here.

Re:Link to Auction

[AnomalyConcept]

What would be really funny if it said "shipping not included" on the eBay site. XD

I wonder...

[cdrudge]

how high a 10kg super bouncy ball would bounce going 4000mph in low gravity. Think it would bounce hard enough to hit the space station?

Re:I wonder...

[Phanatic1a]

Good question. 4000 mph ~= 1800mps, KE = .5(10)(1,800)^2 = 16 megajoules. Perfectly elastic collision gets you a PE = 16 MJ = 10 kilograms * 9.8/6 * height, so the height would be...damn, a million meters? That's pretty friggin' high.

Re:I wonder...

[RoloDMonkey]

That would explaing that noise.

Re:I wonder...

[quixoticsycophant]

The bounce would be large enough to invalidate your presupposition of a uniform gravitational field.

The gravitational field is dropping off with the inverse of the distance from the moon's center (i.e. the gravitational force going with the inverse square).

It would bounce much, much "higher".

wtf

[U.I.D 754625]

Hell, give me the $6 million and I'll get rid of your 10kg of junk. What a waste. It's the kind of people who buy SUVs for their daily commute that are behind these sorts of things.

Littering or trespassing?

[kalislashdot]

So if it lands on the property I bought from the Lunar Embassey (http://www.moonshop.com/) can I sue them for littering, or even trespassing. I am serious, I have the paperwork and everything. Don't tread on me!

Re:How much does a A-bomb weigh?

[whiteranger99x]

If we all chip in we could nuke the moon...

D'oh!! We have to save those for the oncoming asteriods, you nitwit! :P

me!

[jjeffries]

At first I thought, well, I'll just off myself and then I can be the first person buried on (in?) the moon!

But I see there is a 10kg weight limit...

Thus, I have decided to cut off my head, and have just it sent to the moon! Eat your heart out, Walt Disney!

Re:huh?

[The Fanta Menace]

They're pointing out that some people are simply useless. Bored rich guys are typically the most useless people we have on this planet. Along with those bimbos who walk down catwalks.

Even better!

[Jin Wicked]

Procure a corporate sponsorship from the Kraft company to get their logo on there, then you really could mess with little kids by telling them the moon is made of cheese. ^_^

Gah...

[nuclear305]

Have we *really* run out of space on Earth to pollute and feel the need to throw our useless junk on the moon before we even colonize it?

I'm all for scientific missions and even some sight-seeing by probes, but I can't help but wonder how throwing our junk at the moon would impact possible future plans to establish a human presence there.

But hey, maybe those moon creatures living in the craters could use a few old Playboys or some worn-out shoes.

Stinking face in the Sky

[polemistes]

And in 25 years after 36500025 * 10kg garbage thrown at Earth's untill now pure and romantic little sister in space, we will be able to smell it all the way through the vast space, and the scientists have to change all their theories about the speed of odour through vacuum.

Why not the sun?

[dj245]

Seriously, for $6 million dollars, I would want to add my cremated remains to the fusion reactor that is our sun. If they can escape Earths's gravity and send a craft on a trajectory towards the moon, surely they can aim for the sun as well. Nobody cares about the moon except Bush. I say we aim for the sun.

Re:Why not the sun?

[dozer]

It's easy to orbit the sun (heck, you're doing that right now), but it's pretty hard to actually hit it.

Let's say you're a satellite orbiting earth and you want to hit the earth's surface as soon as possible. What direction should you fire your thrusters? Assume current techology: you have relatively little thrust at your disposal.

Most people say, "fire the thrusters directly away from the earth!" This is actually wrong. It will make your orbit elliptical, but it would take a very long time to actually hit the earth. The best direction to fire is exactly against the direction of your forward motion, tangential to earth. Slow yourself down and let the earth's gravity take over.

The moon orbits the earth at 2300 MPH (1 km/s), but orbits the earth at 67,000 MPH (30 km/s). This should give some idea as to the difference in scale. There are more difficulties too, mostly because you're trying to boost yourself UP to the moon but DOWN to the sun.

Of course, you could also shoot yourself toward another planet and get a gravity assist toward the sun. That would take a lot less energy but a lot more time.

Quick calculation

[MajorG17]

Damn, Bill Gates does weigh more than 10 kilograms...

Who's plot will it land in?

[GoodGuys]

Say, what about those guys who sold us plots of land on the moon? Do you think if they crash it in my plot I can sue them?
Has anyone else considered this?
(Both serious and funny replies are welcome).

10 kg, eh?

[aduzik]

You could probably fit about 1/7 of Darl McBride in 10 kg -- let's say just the head. Now if only I had $6 million...

And the second chance offer goes to...

[Hogwash McFly]

Dr. Evil

"A frickin' good eBayer, they sent my "laser" to the moon in frickin' quick time. A++++++++++"

Sure

[Transcendent]

Let's just start polluting the moon! Let's litter its surface with tons of our crap for a nominal fee! Maybe someday our grandchildren will enjoy a nice, multi-color moon to lighten the night sky...

Does anyone else here thing this is horrible?

Exactly

[joggle]

Why does everything have to be in the name of SCIENCE?

Think of the irony of sending a college textbook on physics as the payload! Actually, I have a specific one in mind, care to chip in? I was considering making a bonfire out of it, but this would be MUCH more fun.

Interplanetary pollution

[securitas]

We have lots of garbage and pollution on Earth, lots of space-junk in orbit around the Earth that is widely predicted to become a hazard, and plenty of junk left on the Moon's surface from the manned and unmanned expeditions.

The place isn't even accessible to tourists yet and someone has come up with a way to pre-pollute it.

Do we really want to turn the Moon into an interplanetary garbage dump?

Keep your litter and junk to yourself.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[stienman]

If you could find a way of making someone pay you 6 million to dump a bucket full of 'stuff' in your yard, you'd do it. If someone payed you 6 million to dump a bucket full of stuff somewhere in yellowstone park, subject to some restrictions, then you'd likely do it in a heartbeat. Why is the moon so special? When spaceships can pollute a large portion of the moon, they'll be able to take people there and the pollution will happen naturally. But the pollution from this one 'hit' will be so small that you'll actually have to look for it, you aren't just going to stumble across it.

-Adam

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[the_mad_poster]

If you could find a way of making someone pay you 6 million to dump a bucket full of 'stuff' in your yard, you'd do it

If someone payed you 6 million to dump a bucket full of stuff somewhere in yellowstone park, subject to some restrictions, then you'd likely do it in a heartbeat.

Ah yes. The ultimate justification for any idiotic, debase action: money.

I'm sorry to hear you have so little moral fiber in your body and can't fathom why someone finds the idea of intentionally polluting an object we can't even inhabit so despicable. It's unfortunate that there are so many people that think like you, because the underlying problem with that kind of thought process is always the same:

If it doesn't directly affect me, why should I care?

Dropping 10 kg of junk on the surface of a desloate object in space isn't a big deal. It's the principal of the thing. Human beings seem to be the only life on earth that would consider intentionally dropping garbage somewhere just because they can. A sad commentary on human nature, I suppose.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[Anonymous Coward]

ultimate justification for any idiotic, debase action

Actually, I've found that the usual reason is the smug self-righteousness that possesses a lot of people, which convinces them that whatever they do must be a correct action since their hearts are pure and they're so much more... you know... moral than all those other people.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[another_henry]

I feel I must reiterate this again and again. The moon is FUCKING HUGE. If we have the capability to transport enough junk there to make any kind of a mess at all then our tech will be advanced enough that this won't be a problem.

Furthermore it's a dead rock anyway, and I can't think of a better place for an interplanetary garbage dump. Well maybe dropping stuff into Jupier. Even Venus is interesting.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[stienman]

I'm sorry to hear you have so little moral fiber in your body and can't fathom why someone finds the idea of intentionally polluting an object we can't even inhabit so despicable. It's unfortunate that there are so many people that think like you, because the underlying problem with that kind of thought process is always the same:

Gee, you're right. I'm going to change my culture and ideals because you took time to insult me and all the people you grouped me with.

So, are you saying that you would not accept 6 million dollars to dump a bucket of stuff in the middle of yellowstone park (subject to some restrictions)? You didn't exactly specify that you wouldn't - you only decided that I must have bad morals because I posited that most people would. would it make a difference if I said I'd put that money to good use - such as donating it to yellowstone park?

Are you principled only when it's convenient for you, or do you make every reasonable attempt to follow your own ideals at all times, in all places, and under any circumstances?

At this point the discussion devolves into Churchill's quote (paraphrased):
"Madam, would you sleep with me for a million pounds?"
"I do believe I would."
"How about for 5 pounds?"
"What kind of a woman do you think I am?!"
"We've already determined that, now we're just haggling over price.

-Adam

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[ciroknight]

Who knows, in the future, it might be a quite lucrative business running an interplanetary junk yard. Not only would it be cheaper (and safer to humans) to run an incenerator on a huge rock with no atmosphere (just as long as the material you wanted to "burn" provided its own oxygen supply, or was destructable when HUGE doses of radiation are applied to it), it would be quite profitable in the long run. Hell, with the way we treat earth, we could almost start doing this today.

When space travel becomes cheap enough, I'm sure we'll this kind of thing popping up on lots of moons. The only thing moons are good for really are the fact that they're magnificent gravity wells, pretty to look at in the sky, most of the time are completely inhospitable (making them good junk locations), etc etc. I for one hate the idea of taking perfectly usable material and moving it to a location where it'll just sit unused, but in a location like space, we could find new ways to recycle the material and ship it back. The only thing stopping us now is the cost of the trip, which, with new technologies like space elevators and possible air breathing, horizonal launch vehicles, these costs should go down quickly. It's a shame we spent more time on innovation of the things we put in space, and not on the things we use to get it there.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[topham]

I still trying to figure out what constitutes pollution in an environment that is so hostile to life.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[the_mad_poster]

...I'm going to change my culture and ideals...

So, your culture and ideals include, explicitly, your ability to be bought off?

You're getting caught up on the quantity when I'm talking about the principal. The quantity is irrelevant. Would you shoot a starving child in the face who was going to die anyway for 6 million dollars? More? How about 1 billion? The act you're being paid for is not the point, and that's the point.

The point is this: human beings would actually seek to ACTIVELY GO OUT OF THEIR WAY to pollute something.

However, if you'd like to discuss the particulars of the issue instead, I have a serious problem with your "ends justify the means" mentality. If you dump 22 pounds of trash in the middle of yellowstone (ah yes... "with restrictions"), you are polluting yellowstone national park. Are you going to dispute that? So, you get your 6 million, and you give it ALL to charity. So what? You still polluted Yellowstone, now didn't you? In fact, you went out of your way to do it.

Now, while it's still immoral, it's FORGIVABLE which is entirely different. However, this is a "commercial spacecraft project" that is seeking to profit by intentionally polluting a foreign object and is going well out of its way to do it. Only humans could be so pathetically crass.

Is ~22 pounds of material a big deal? No, it's the point that these morons are doing it on purpose and for profit, and that some imbecile will actually spend the money for it.

I can accept that human progress pollutes. This is not progress. This is intentional destruction for the amusement of some sorry buffoon who doesn't have anything better to do with his or her time. The point isn't that 22 pounds isn't a big deal, it's that they're doing at all.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[NanoGator]

"Do we really want to turn the Moon into an interplanetary garbage dump?"

Well I do have a couple of bodies to bury...

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[stienman]

I believe that in this context pollution is simply defined as "Putting something somewhere that we don't want there." It's like a scientist who has 'polluted' a flagon of sulferic acid with, say, peanut butter. The compound is no longer good for many (if not most) uses.

In this and many other cases it's often a personal belief or desire. In some cases there are reasonable reasons for avoiding certian 'pollution' (such as rinsing the orange juice glass before filling with milk).

-Adam

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[shadowbearer]

Great post, and I agree with you.

My biggest beef with this ridiculous idea is that they are wasting a launch that could be used to do useful things; now, if they were using the launch to test a new lunar-capable booster and this was a way of raising funds, ok. But they're not. These guys are going to buy a booster launch from someone else for an idea that, on the face of it, is just plain stupid.

This is intentional destruction for the amusement of some sorry buffoon who doesn't have anything better to do with his or her time.

s/time/money.

What a waste. I hope their auction fails because people with $6M are too intelligent to waste it in this way. (Unfortunately, someone just may take them up on it - reminds me of the old axiom of fools and money). What the hell, it probably won't go anyway - and if it does, they'll end up spending more to pull it off than they get (or get sued by the auction winner when they go bust). Stupid, stupid, stupid.

SB

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[gargan]

Did you just happen to be eating a peanut butter sandwich and drinking a glass of milk when you posted that? you sure did make me hungry...

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[Stray7Xi]

Not only would it be cheaper (and safer to humans) to run an incenerator on a huge rock with no atmosphere (just as long as the material you wanted to "burn" provided its own oxygen supply, or was destructable when HUGE doses of radiation are applied to it)

Why ship it to the moon to incinerate it... you could just nudge it out of earth's orbit and let the sun pull it the rest of the way in and it'll be vaporized. I imagine there are side effects of using the sun as a dump (maybe increasing the mass and gravitational forces would disrupt planets orbits??) but I think throwing even the whole earth into the sun would have so little relative effect it'd be like pissing in the ocean.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[SEWilco]

I imagine there are side effects of using the sun as a dump (maybe increasing the mass)

The Sun has over 99 percent of the mass of the Solar System. You could drop Jupiter in it without bothering it. Although it might be bothered if you dropped in the project's Environmental Impact Statement.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[Graff]

Why ship it to the moon to incinerate it... you could just nudge it out of earth's orbit and let the sun pull it the rest of the way in and it'll be vaporized.

From what I understand it actually takes more energy to send something from Earth orbit into the Sun than it would take to send the object on a path to escape the solar system. This is because in order to crash into the Sun you first have to cancel out the velocity imparted by being in Earth's orbit around the Sun in the first place. However if you wanted to leave the solar system you would simply add some velocity to your orbit around the Sun and this would kick you to an orbit further from the Sun.

In other words the quantity of energy needed to lower your orbital velocity to zero relative to the Sun would be less than the amount you need to add to escape from orbiting the Sun. This means that it probably takes less energy to send something to the Moon than it would take to send it to the Sun.

According to my quick calculations it would take a velocity of approximately 42 km/s to escape the solar system from Earth's orbit. Earth imparts a velocity of approximately 30 km/s to any object which is in a similar orbit around the sun. This means that you would need to either slow down by 30 km/s to hit the sun (30 km/s - 0 km/s) or you would need to speed up by 12 km/s to leave the solar system (42 km/s - 30 km/s).

Strange, but true - it actually takes less energy to leave the solar system than it is to crash into the sun from Earth orbit. This, of course, is not counting stuff like orbital slingshots around other planets and such which could decrease the energy needed for both crashing the Sun and leaving it.

Here's the site where I got some of the data I used for my calculations, as well as the formulas for escape velocity and such.

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[Stray7Xi]

my intuition would say that if it takes 30km/s for Earth orbit, that slowing down to 29km/s would be enough so that it'd eventually spiral into sun?

What happens to such an object slowed down to 18km/s, does it take a more elliptical orbit then the earth?

Re:Interplanetary pollution

[Graff]

my intuition would say that if it takes 30km/s for Earth orbit, that slowing down to 29km/s would be enough so that it'd eventually spiral into sun?

What happens to such an object slowed down to 18km/s, does it take a more elliptical orbit then the earth?

If you only canceled out 1 km/sec of the velocity then you would just orbit a bit closer to the Sun.

As for whether the orbit would be circular or elliptical it depends on how the velocity change is done. Remember that velocity is a vector. If any part of the velocity vector has a component which is perpendicular to directly into the Sun then you will continue to orbit the sun. If all of the velocity is perpendicular to a path directly into the Sun then you will have a circular orbit. The more that your velocity is toward the Sun, the more elliptical your orbit will be.

The only way you would spiral into the Sun would be if you were losing velocity perpendicular to a path directly into the Sun. This could be through interaction with interstellar dust or through the action of a rocket. Look at something like a comet. There are many comets that have been orbiting the Sun for millions upon millions of years in highly elliptical orbits. They slow down a little over those years and they do spiral closer to the Sun but it still will be quite some time before they slow enough to crash into it. In fact, most crash into it because their orbits have been changed due to interaction with another large body such as Jupiter which changed the direction of their velocity vector from being partially perpendicular to the Sun to being almost directly into it.

The other thing is that you really don't have to get down to a velocity of 0 km/sec because the Sun is not a point but rather it is a sphere. However, you would need to get down to fairly close to 0 in order to take up a close enough orbit to crash into the surface. I just said 0 because it wasn't worth working out if it was 1 km/sec or 0 km/sec that was needed to orbit close enough.

But what happens when...

[jolyonr]

they start firing things back at us?

Jolyon

Ink

[a1cypher]

I wonder if you sent up 10kg of Blue Ink/Powder if you could see it from an earth telescope. That would be kinda cool.

You might be a futuristic redneck if....

[Himring]

Today:
"You consider a six-pack and a bug zapper to be quality entertainment."

Tomorrow:
"You consider a six-pack and making a crater in the moon quality entertainment."

The Tick

[Nephroth]

I think I'd much rather just carve my name in the moon... C H A I R F... damn, foiled again.

I've got some good use for 10kgs of mass.

[flowerp]

I'd love to put 10 kgs of Antimatter up there. The flash and the following explosion should be strong enough to be seen even in daylight.

Info about company and founder

[wildmage]

The company is Orbital Development.

Gregory Nemitz is an interesting character. I am a little skeptical about the deal since you are purchasing a "project" and not an actual mission. So there are very few guarantees attached, and you have limited authority of the project.

I think Nemitz's more interesting project is the most credible attempt to assert ownership over an extraterrestrial body. Specifically, he is asserting his claim over the near earth asteroid Eros.

On his website you can see legal correspondence between him and NASA as he gives them an invoice for a parking fee for their NEAR spacecraft that crash landed on the asteroid. Also available is his explanation of what he is doing and why he is doing. A very interesting read, and it gives some in-depth analysis of the nature of property ownership.

Re:Info about company and founder

[wildmage]

Well, the parking fee is just a premise to get a declaration of ownership from the federal government. The invoice is like $10 per century, so its not really anything to get up in arms for.

So NASA said there claims are without basis. Then state department says it violates the Outer Space Treaty, however that only applies to governments annexing extra terrestrial bodies and doesn't apply to private citizens.

So now he's involved in litigation and his argument is based on some complex legal theory that I don't pretend understand called work-equity. You can think of like it homesteading, where you squat a piece of land, and put development in it. After a while, the government recognizes your claim because of all the work you put in it. However, Nemitz isn't physically at the asteroid. Possession is 9/10th of the law, but he doesn't have possession, so his legal arguments are based on other 1/10th.

Anyway, though his claims may be dubious, his goal is to set a legal precedent for this kind of thing where one does not currently exist. This will give investors a clearer understanding and more certain environment of the legal framework for space property where one does not currently exist.

I'd set up encrypted data storage...

[stienman]

I'd send up an optical 10gbps repeater (otherwise know by it's more technical term, "corner cube" though the active version could also have storage of its own) and store 3.2megabytes of data in flight between the earth and the moon. If the feds ever call, it'll be erased with absolutely no trace in 2.56 seconds.

-Adam

Big airbags - bubble wrap - foam - cones.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

I think we can safely guarantee the condition of just about any cargo which hits the moon at that speed.

Implying that it will be destroyed, right?

Not necessarily.

This is just an extreme case of the "egg drop" problem used by the UofMich ingineering school ion their packaging class one year (and no doubt other engineering schools from time to time).

Problem: Package a raw egg with less than (x) grams of packing material so that it can be dropped from the roof of the four-floor engineering building to the concrete below and arrive intact.

A number of solutions were tried. Some I remember hearing about:
- Suspended inside a ball by rubber bands.
- bubble wrap variants
- foam peanut variants
- Stuffed into the top of a stack of styrofoam cups with kleenex, fins added to last cup to insure bottom cup arrives end-on. (Energy absorbed by friction of cup stack cracking and collapsing).

(That last one was a winner and led directly to the nested-sheetmetal protectors you sometimes see on freeways in front of overpass support piers.)

Then we have NASA's recent "airbag" landing on Mars.

4K MPH is a bit extreme. But you've got a LOT of space to, for instance, blow up a LARGE airbag/bubblewrap analog, and plenty of time to do it.

Encapsulated electronics, and even moving parts if packed correctly, can handle thousands of Gs easily. (Think about MOOG's final test for his synthesizer components: Three feet to a cement floor, must stll be fully operational and still correctly tuned afterward.) 4000 MPH = 5867 fps. Bullets are routinely accellerated to that velocity in a few feet without distortion from the g forces involved (though that is a bit extreme), and bullets with moving parts (such as spin-armed explosive rounds) to maybe a couple thousand FPS ditto.

So figure inflating maybe a 50 foot radius cluster of 'way thin kevlar balloons or bubble-wrap with aerojell just before impact, and taking maybe 20kg at the peak of decelleration, and it should be survivable.

Re:Big airbags - bubble wrap - foam - cones.

[DerekLyons]

So figure inflating maybe a 50 foot radius cluster of 'way thin kevlar balloons or bubble-wrap with aerojell just before impact, and taking maybe 20kg at the peak of decelleration, and it should be survivable.

• Aerogel is a solid and can't 'inflate' anything.
• At the speeds involved (5867fps), your 'airbag' wouldn't even be noticed.

Yeah...

[Cyno01]

We'd better not piss off those mooninites. No one can defeat their quad-laser! Jumping...is useless...

Tip of the interplanetary iceberg

[gidds]

What about the principle? If we're thinking up good reasons to dump stuff there before we've even got there ourselves, just think what good reasons we'll have once we get there. And how quickly the mess will grow from something immeasurably insignificant to something noticeable, to something problematic, to something tragic. It's the thin end of the wedge, the tip of the interplanetary iceberg.

You can't argue that because one axe cutting down one tree has little effect, that therefore the rainforests are safe. It's the same here; one canister might be inconsequential, but if we endorse it, what else will we have to allow?

moonrock

[MagicM]

If anyone has a moonrock laying around, I think they should send it back up there.

For some reason, that would make me chuckle...

Not likely

[kitzilla]

AS IF I'm going to bid 6mil on that auction. Seller has zero feedback.

Not only that: they don't take PayPal.

Re:huh?

[wintermute1974]

I wonder what became of that spacefaring bunch of losers.

Psst, your ancestry is showing.

Super Balls!

[Anonymous Coward]

How about a few kilos of superballs delivered at 4000mph, that oughta gimme some bang for the buck!

Throw me into the Sun, thanks!

[gargan]

I've actually always wanted to go out by being cremated and having at least some of my ashes flung into the general direction of the sun, and open and scatter into the universe. They'd probably drift into the sun and go with it when it explodes. I think it's a nice idea, and what else is a dead body good for?

Misplaced resources

[Entropy2016]

Hmm, which should I choose?

Spending 6 million bucks on shifting lunar rock?

or

Feeding some homeless people?

I'm interested in getting a hold of an IQ test on all millionaires, and comparing the results to the rest of the population.

pollution isn't inherently immoral

[foreverdisillusioned]

What is polluting what, here? A very small bit of metal is "polluting" a huge, cold rock whirling around a nuclear fireball, which will some day swell and swallow up that rock. I'm sorry, but this is not immoral. Polution *can be* immoral because of the negative ways it affects LIFE--and I'm pretty sure that there is no life on the moon. You're taking a slightly bizzare (though understandable) aethetic to keep the moon "unspoiled" and turning it into a moral issue, but it's NOT. It's aethetics, and nothing more. It doesn't matter at all if a bit of metal was mined on earth, processed, then blasted off to some other bit of rock. It just doesn't. You can't even argue that it's unsightly, because there's no one there to see it. I'm not saying that this isn't a stupid thing to do (it is), but immoral? Hah...

Orbdev = crackpots

[phritz]

Orbdev has been on slashdot before; if you recall, these guys are suing NASA for parking a probe on "their" asteroid. Take a minute to poke around their website - after I realized who these guys are, I realized there's no way they'll ever be able to figure out a way to get some millionaire's 10 kg of trash to the moon. Total and utter crackpots.

This is intresting

[Martigan80]

Shipping and handling: Free Shipping (within United States)

You'd figure for 6 Million this would aply world wide.

moon marking fireworks

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember a Robert Heinlien story where there was a commercial venture to the moon. At one point they mentioned selling a cola company a way to mark the moon with ash. the result would be a giant advertisement in the sky forever. Of course they then sold the compeating cola company the rights to be the pop that kept the moon clean. They got money and were able to not carry the extra weight of moon-fireworks.

Re:You're a polluter

[IceAgeComing]

Bla bla bla...spare me intellectual BS. Seriously though. You very nature of being human at this point in time is contributing to the pollution problem. And it's not just you, it's everyone (99.9999%) that takes part in 1st world activity.

Great reason to throw all principles away, huh? Believe it or not, I ride around on a bicycle to/from work because I believe it makes a difference. And sure, I dry my clothes in the dryer instead of on the line right now. But just because we can't be perfect (and none of us will ever be) doesn't mean you should give up completely.

Nothing would get done with an attitude like "We're not perfect, so why even try to be better?"

You're at the "ground zero" of cynical thought with that one.

Re:If I had my choice,

[Technician]

I'd send up a bucket of golf balls and have them delivered near Neal Armstrong's. It'll give future archeologists more of a challange. :-)

Re:huh?

[metlin]

Ah! Slashdot, the only place where Bimbos, Catwalks and Useless will be seen in the same sentence.

I, for one, can think up several uses for/with them Bimbos :-p

Simple Question

[VivianC]

How many AOL CDs can we fit in 10Kg?

Forget the cargo, take some pictures

[Avlimator]

What would be cool is to see someone launch a vehicle like this, but instead of pointlessly crashing something into the moon, do some fly-bys of various lunar landing sites and send some high quality pictures back.

Paint It RED!

[gmby]

How about a big 10Kg red paint ball?

Then you can say that you got to:

SHOOT THE MOON!

and of course it will need to be biodegradable paint!

Re:Paint It RED!

[misof]

This reminds me of an old joke:

American astronauts arrive to the moon. Their communication with Earth:

• Astronauts, 12:00: It's okay, we are the first men to the moon.
• Astronauts, 13:00: Russians are landing nearby! What shall we do?
• NASA, 13:01: Just wait.
• Astronauts, 14:00: The Russians started to PAINT THE MOON RED! What shall we do?
• NASA, 14:01: Just wait.
• Astronauts, 17:00: The Russians are done, almost the whole moon is red... What the hell shall we do?
• NASA, 17:01: Now it is our turn! Open the container with white paint and write: Coca-Cola!

What about an old HD?

[Mercury2k]

I have an old defective 9gig SCSI that I would be love to see hit some surface at mach 4. But could data recovery companies still recover my data? ;)

Its not polluting the moon...

[mlush]

... its polluting Earth. Most of the rockets mass is going to be spread in Earths atmosphere and the solid waste will be end up dropping into our 'back yard' or worse in orbit where it can damage real space craft.

On top of that there is the waste producing the rocket, not just rubbish going to the corporate dustbins and drains, but energy needed to refine and machine the materials has a cost in pollution.

Its not the kilograms on the Moon, the kiloton's on the Earth that are the real issue

Re:If I had to guess...

[ColaMan]

See here :Apollo 15 Passive Seismic Experiment

Do they qualify?

[buzzsport]

Just think - Rosie O'donnell, Oprah Winfrey, and Martha Stewart all taken care of in one mission.