Slashdot Mirror


First Zero-Gravity Wedding Planned

Trenchcoatjedi writes "A couple from Brooklyn, NY are planning the first wedding in zero gravity. The wedding will take place June 20th aboard a parabolic flight operated by Zero G Corp and will be officiated by Richard Garriott of Ultima fame. The dress is designed by a Japanese haute couture designer and is specifically intended to be worn in zero gravity. Even the wedding rings will be made from meteorite."

133 comments

  1. BORING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I want to hear or better yet see the first zero gravity honeymoon.

    1. Re:BORING! by Mr.+Roadkill · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't think it qualifies as a honeymoon, but there's this:

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0310288/

    2. Re:BORING! by Moblaster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apparently there will be no honeymoon. The wedding has already been cancelled because the bride's father found out he is expected to shell out over $2 billion to cover the $20 million launch tickets for all the guests. That cheap bastard. I told my sister not to marry into poverty!

    3. Re:BORING! by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 1

      Well, I doubt its exactly what the AC is looking for, the first "Space Honeymoon" is already planned, as soon as SpaceShipTwo gets flying: http://spacelove.org/. Information is on the menu bar on the bottom... Loretta and George Whitesides have already bought their tickets, although I think lately they've been too busy to update that particular page.

    4. Re:BORING! by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately they may discover that their mutual attraction is purely gravitational.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    5. Re:BORING! by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      Actually, any reasonable sex position is damn near impossible in space. The missionary is the hardest, though not the most exciting anyway. I think someone actually developed a suit specifically designed for screwing in Null-G.

      Long story short, the honeymoon wouldn't be that exciting.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    6. Re:BORING! by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      They'll have to use the three Dolphins technique.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  2. No time to change your mind by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...since it will all be over in 30 seconds.

    1. Re:No time to change your mind by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Funny

      I know I am doomed to sound sexist, but seriously, only a woman can think that spending 5 years salary on a 1 hour ceremony + the hell of putting entire clumps of both families together, while drinking, is a good idea.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    2. Re:No time to change your mind by xous · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, I like the drinking part.

    3. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thing this is a classical wadding including a women and a man

    4. Re:No time to change your mind by samcan · · Score: 1

      You don't even need drinking to make it bad. :-D

      It's not necessarily sexist...my mom has always told me that I can have a nice wedding quite inexpensively. But then, what ./er gets married?

    5. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ordinarily I'd agree with you, but the articles say that the dude's the one who wants it. "Noah wanted to get married in space but we probably won't be able to afford it for another 25 to 50 years - so I suggested this as a compromise."

    6. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like the sex

    7. Re:No time to change your mind by Jamie's+Nightmare · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Only feminists would label telling the truth as sexist. I don't think you'll find many of them here.

      --
      "When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
    8. Re:No time to change your mind by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      while drinking

      While alternating between zero and two G every two minutes? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. More like a continuous car crash than a quiet evening.

    9. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehe, a homophobe replying to a sexist.

    10. Re:No time to change your mind by moosesocks · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, I like the drinking part.

      That was the compromise.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    11. Re:No time to change your mind by rishistar · · Score: 2, Funny

      I need the drinking part.

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    12. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whilst what s/he says is entirely factually correct, it's still sexist, because it's selective observation. Notice that he left out the observation that 'men are stupid because they spend several months pay just to get a few extra inches extra on the already-massive new TV, that no-one will even notice?'*. It's like if you "observe" that black people commit crime. That's racist, because EVERYONE commits crime, and specifying 'black people' insinuates that they're the only culprits.

      *Disclaimer: As a man, I think that it's totally worth it/awesome, but YMMV.

    13. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's the Noah you're thinking of. He finally saved up enough money for the wedding. What a visionary!

    14. Re:No time to change your mind by nausea_malvarma · · Score: 1

      I know I am doomed to sound sexist, but seriously, only a woman can think that spending 5 years salary on a 1 hour ceremony + the hell of putting entire clumps of both families together, while drinking, is a good idea.

      No, any idiot with lots of money and unrealistic expectations about marriage could come up with this plan, be they man, woman, or other.

    15. Re:No time to change your mind by noundi · · Score: 1

      "Noah wanted to get married in space but he came to his senses and built an ark instead."

      Fixed it for ya.

      --
      I am the lawn!
    16. Re:No time to change your mind by noundi · · Score: 1

      On the other hand the man that spends several months of salary just to get a few extra inches on the already-massive new TV doesn't deserve to have a penis. Equation solved.

      --
      I am the lawn!
    17. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Does the man who spends several months of salary just to get a few extra inches on his penis deserve a new TV?

    18. Re:No time to change your mind by macshit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      while drinking

      While alternating between zero and two G every two minutes? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. More like a continuous car crash than a quiet evening.

      Like a lot of bad ideas, it'll probably make for great stories though....

      "Grandpa, is it true you got married while covered in vomit?"

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    19. Re:No time to change your mind by sonicmerlin · · Score: 0

      s/he? Ugh... that's almost as bad as Spock saying "Where no *one* has gone before". Please save me from the stupidity.

    20. Re:No time to change your mind by nacho_dh · · Score: 1

      only a woman can think that spending 5 years salary on a 1 hour ceremony...

      well... whose salary are we talking about?

      --
      The world is a tragedy to those who feel, but a comedy to those who think.
    21. Re:No time to change your mind by jeffmeden · · Score: 2, Funny

      No time to change your mind ...since it will all be over in 30 seconds.

      Thats... What she said?

    22. Re:No time to change your mind by maxume · · Score: 1

      5 years! Even the most outrageous weddings I have seen are more like 6 months, if that (but I don't really fly in ritzy circles either).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    23. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best part is, they're both closet gays. Let's hope chance strikes like in the movies and these two end up meeting (then meating) each other via craigslist. It'll be beautiful. A little smelly, but beautiful.

    24. Re:No time to change your mind by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
      And in typical poser hipster style, they're only paying "about half the cost" of their guests travelling with them. "So, ummm, to attend our wedding, you'll have to fly here, and pony up $2,700 per person for the flight".

      Wow.

      Oh, and how sweet of them! WE can help pay too! They've helpfully put a "Donate via Paypal!" link on their website.

      Uhhh, no.

      Tell me why I would donate so some posers can have their wedding in the vomit comet?

      Ye gods.

    25. Re:No time to change your mind by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      As long as I don't have to clean it up, it sounds like a totally awesome idea.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    26. Re:No time to change your mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      while drinking

      While alternating between zero and two G every two minutes? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. More like a continuous car crash than a quiet evening.

      iIwould rather do that M thing at 6 g's in a Lotus on the salt flats! i am a rewiringangel but now just an anonymous cow yard

  3. Seriously by DrugCheese · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I hope some one out there is in the industry and can hook up with Zero G Corp and bring us all Zero G tits.

    I think it would seriously sell.

    --
    *DrugCheese rants*
    1. Re:Seriously by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      and bring us all Zero G tits.

      First "beer goggles", now "space goggles".
           

  4. Like the old saying goes by seifried · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Money can't buy good taste.

    1. Re:Like the old saying goes by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Funny

      I thought it was "There's no accounting for taste."

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Like the old saying goes by seifried · · Score: 1

      That too.

    3. Re:Like the old saying goes by jadv · · Score: 1

      I thought it was "There's no accounting for taste."

      I thought it was: "My accountant has no taste." :) (Sorry, lame joke there, gonna cost me some karma I guess) Exactly under what jurisdiction are they getting married? And if they ever want to divorce, are they gonna have to go up into space again to do it? Is a pre-nuptial agreement written here on Earth void in the great void of outer space? (OK, somebody please take my keyboard away ASAP)

    4. Re:Like the old saying goes by princessproton · · Score: 1

      I can see it now: "The ex-wife took the whole damn planet in the divorce. All I got left is my bones."

      --
      I'm always positive; it's my nature.
    5. Re:Like the old saying goes by Pikoro · · Score: 1

      For those who haven't seen the new Star Trek reboot yet, that is the reason that McCoy from Star Trek is called "Bones". It's something McCoy says to Kirk.

      --
      "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
    6. Re:Like the old saying goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was "If you have money, you don't need taste."

    7. Re:Like the old saying goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was "There's no accounting for taste."

      I thought it was: "My accountant has no taste." :)

      (Sorry, lame joke there, gonna cost me some karma I guess)

      Exactly under what jurisdiction are they getting married? And if they ever want to divorce, are they gonna have to go up into space again to do it? Is a pre-nuptial agreement written here on Earth void in the great void of outer space?

      (OK, somebody please take my keyboard away ASAP)

      Forgetting the forgettable joke, I'll address you questions. (Go ahead mod me redundant for it, I dare you!:))

      They all are moot for this event, as this wedding will be taking place well in the atmosphere. Furthermore it seems they will also be in US airspace, so the only legal issues would have already been ironed-out by few crazy fools that get married while skydiving.

    8. Re:Like the old saying goes by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Like being short for "sawbones" wasn't a good enough explanation for them for an old country doctor's nickname.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    9. Re:Like the old saying goes by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I thought it was "There's no accounting for taste."

      I thought it was: "My accountant has no taste."

      I thought it was: "My dog has no nose." "How does he smell?" "An earthy, peaty sort of aroma, with a hint of lilac."

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    10. Re:Like the old saying goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Money can't buy good taste.

      right on! I am up with Good Taste... fluttering in an uninsulated bomber is tres fait

  5. Meteorite rings? by penguin_punk · · Score: 1

    I'm more interested in the rings.

    --
    HURD - Hurd's Under Research & Development
    1. Re:Meteorite rings? by Mr.+Roadkill · · Score: 3, Interesting
      http://www.chrisploof.com/meteoriteprocess.html

      http://www.erinfinnegan.com/sam/?cat=20

      The yellow gold one at erinfinnegan[dot]com seems to be constructed similarly to my gold-and-titanium wedding ring, which was made about 20 years ago by this guy: http://jewellerydavidcruickshank.com.au/

    2. Re:Meteorite rings? by Shooter6947 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Dunno anything about these folks' rings, but I got my wife an engagement ring with Martian basalt in it. Thankfully she is also a nerd, and in fact studies the Moon and Mars for her research. Otherwise I don't recommend this tactic, as it's likely to get you slapped rather than engaged . . .

    3. Re:Meteorite rings? by noundi · · Score: 1

      That's no moon!

      --
      I am the lawn!
    4. Re:Meteorite rings? by Mad_Rain · · Score: 1

      Meteorite rings are fine for some nerdy couples. For those people who like to be more hands-on and build stuff ourselves (like my wife and I), we made our own rings (with a little help from an instructor).

      http://www.newyorkweddingring.com/

      --
      "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
  6. Poor planning by Snarf+You · · Score: 5, Funny

    A zero-G wedding sounds nice at first, but the divorce will cost 100 G's.

    1. Re:Poor planning by linzeal · · Score: 3, Informative

      So it will be cheaper than a normal divorce ?

  7. Not really by timpdx · · Score: 0

    Parabolic flights are simulated zero G. If I jump out of a plane in a cardboard box, then I, too have the illusion of zero G. In relation to my confining cardboard walls, I think I am floating. These flights are exactly the same principle. When they marry onboard a Virgin Galactic flight, then we can argue. Even then, they will be in micro gravity, not true "Zero G."

    1. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WAy to RUIN my WEDDING NERds! I hate you all. Your just ugly losers. Get a life!!

    2. Re:Not really by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      heh, guy disses use of "zero-g" and counters with "micro-gravity" .. it's amazing how hard the words "in free fall" are to some people.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:Not really by FooAtWFU · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Really what's the difference between orbit and a Vomit Comet - besides the fact that the latter is aimed so that it'll hit the ground sooner or or later, and the former isn't? From the relativistic point of view, there isn't really much - just different tracks through a curved region of spacetime. I mean, I suppose objects may be slightly more energetic in orbit and time will elapse at a slightly faster rate, but it's not that much.

      Really, we only experience the feeling of gravity when we try to stop it. (Like when the ground's in the way.) Want to free yourself entirely form the influence of gravity from distant objects that affects the shape of the spacetime you're in ? Sorry, buddy, try another universe.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    4. Re:Not really by Deadstick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Damn, I love it when computer engineers think they're engineers.

      rj

    5. Re:Not really by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Really what's the difference between orbit and a Vomit Comet - besides the fact that the latter is aimed so that it'll hit the ground sooner or or later, and the former isn't?

      Uh, nothing. We only call it falling when you're on a collision course, that's how it works. Also I think that's a pretty fucking big difference, it's the difference between whee! and whee! SPLAT.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Not really by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Parabolic flights are simulated zero G.

      How do you simulate zero G?

      Here's another hint: 'zero G' doesn't mean 'zero gravity' (which is actually an incorrect term even for space). It means that the body is experiencing the equivalent of zero G. Just like a fighter pilot in a tight turn might be at eight Gs doesn't mean that he went to Neptune or some place where the gravitational force is eight times as strong. (Disclaimer: Neptune is actually 17x the Mass of Earth.)

      From Wikipedia: "The g-force of an object is 0 g in any weightless environment such as free-fall or an orbiting satellite" (emphasis mine).

    7. Re:Not really by Creepy · · Score: 1

      speaking of Vomit Comet, it has that name for a reason - and I imagine they may want to restrain from "you may now kiss the bride" until they hit gravity again.

      Couple marries in zero g, then both die choking on vomit. We don't know who's vomit it was, you can't exactly dust for vomit (with thanks to Spinal Tap for that one).

    8. Re:Not really by Creepy · · Score: 1

      Not to mention computer engineers are a subset of electrical engineers (and yes, I was a computer engineering major for a while before changing majors - it was basically EE with focus on chip design and nearly all coding is microcode). He probably meant software engineers, who usually get the ribbing in this area, in which case I say he should go shove a rose bush up his ass (or wait, yeah, mod flamebait).

    9. Re:Not really by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      you can't exactly dust for vomit (with thanks to Spinal Tap for that one).

      Every time you explain your comic references, Slashdot gets a little less funny, an angel loses its wings, and God kills a Domo-kun.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Not really by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Want to free yourself entirely form the influence of gravity from distant objects that affects the shape of the spacetime you're in ? Sorry, buddy, try another universe.

      Meh, I'll settle for a Lagrangian-point wedding.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    11. Re:Not really by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      I'll save the rose bush for the engineer who doesn't understand the concept of freefall.

      rj

    12. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he used it right - either that, or anyone who gets on a Virgin Galactic spaceflight is going to have a hell of a landing.

  8. Obligatory vocabulary: by orngjce223 · · Score: 1

    It's called microgravity, not zero gravity. Someone needs to take their head out of the outdated books sections.

    --
    Note: I was 13 when I wrote most of this. Take with several grains of salt.
    1. Re:Obligatory vocabulary: by SlayerofGods · · Score: 1

      Technically it's called a plane flying a parabolic arc and it can subject it's passengers to any amount of 'gravity' it wants. Someone needs to take their head out of their .... well you know :P

      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    2. Re:Obligatory vocabulary: by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Those are synonyms. They're just cool ways of saying "gravity is still there, but you're falling, so you don't notice."

      And before you bring it up - orbit is the same thing, only you miss the ground.

    3. Re:Obligatory vocabulary: by buzy+buzy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually falling and missing the ground is flying as any HHGTTG fan would know.

      --
      If you get modded down for a first post... What do you get for a last post?
  9. everythings been done now by genner · · Score: 0, Troll

    It will be a while before we get the first wedding in orbit.
    For now every idea has been done.
    You can all stop being original and go get married in a church.

    1. Re:everythings been done now by Stormwatch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can all stop being original and go get married in a church.

      You know what'd be interesting? Going back to the way it was about 400 years ago, before the church took over what was a mutual personal vow. See, until the Counter-Reformation, you didn't need a church or anything: you said "I marry you", she said "I marry you", there, done, married, you may now bed the bride. Now seriously, your word was as good as any signed contract; that, I think, is far more beautiful and moving than any pompous ceremony.

    2. Re:everythings been done now by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Now seriously, your word was as good as any signed contract; that, I think, is far more beautiful and moving than any pompous ceremony."

      Hit the mark, missed the details. A lot of marriages then were more complicated than you describe. Where there was any amount of money involved, there negotiations more akin to a company merger than a love story. Divorces were handled as a matter of contract law.

      Fast forward to now. The state has gotten involved with giving "permission" to marry - they issue marriage licenses. And there are hundreds of pages of legislation and case law to cover what happens when a marriage dissolves, as well as regulate the relationship that people can/will have. And a bitter fight over what the word "marriage" actually means. Lots of progress.

      Her's my proposal: Get rid of "civil" marriage. Blow away "domestic" law. Flip it all over to contract law. Get the state out of the business of regulating what 2 (or more) adults do. You want to have a wedding ceremony in a church? Have a ball - it has no legal weight. For those who don't have lawyers to negotiate the marriage contract, have pattern contracts in the law like they do with real estate transactions. When someone breaks the contract, they break the contract - deal with it.

          As for children, mandate paternity tests at birth to positively identify the genetic father, and mandate that responsibility for the child lies with BOTH genetic parents, 100% each, similar to owning title on a house. Then if the people want to change their legal status later, go do it. Unfair? maybe, but nobody stuck your dick in her for you. There would be no stigma associated with taking a paternity test - it's required of everyone. And isn't it a lot better to find out that a child is not genetically yours at the start of the kids life? Rather than you, and the kid, finding out later that "Daddy" doesn't mean what tehy think it means?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    3. Re:everythings been done now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can all stop being original and go get married in a church.

      You know what'd be interesting? Going back to the way it was about 400 years ago, before the church took over what was a mutual personal vow. See, until the Counter-Reformation, you didn't need a church or anything: you said "I marry you", she said "I marry you", there, done, married, you may now bed the bride. Now seriously, your word was as good as any signed contract; that, I think, is far more beautiful and moving than any pompous ceremony.

      Well sort of, long before the Counter-Reformation The Catholic Church had four criteria for a man and a woman to be married:
      1. Neither of them could currently be married.

      2. Both of them wanted to get married, to each other.

      3. Both of them understood the responsibilities of the commitment (e.g. for instance that it was a supposed to be a life-long commitment).

      4. They had to consummate the union (i.e. they have sex with each-other).

      But as you stated, for a long time if both people in a married couple asserted that all of these four criteria was fulfilled the marriage would be recognized by the Church.

    4. Re:everythings been done now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fast forward to now. The state has gotten involved with giving "permission" to marry - they issue marriage licenses. And there are hundreds of pages of legislation and case law to cover what happens when a marriage dissolves, as well as regulate the relationship that people can/will have. And a bitter fight over what the word "marriage" actually means. Lots of progress.

      First of all, in a legal system based on common law, the state doesn't give "permission to marry", it just defines what it will recognize as a valid marriage. It really only does this because most societies recognize specific rights and responsibilities for married people. So for example, bigomy isn't a crime against the state, it's a crime against other people because it generally involves a high level of deception and fraud towards multiple people for an individual to maintain two "spouses" in this country.

      Her's my proposal: Get rid of "civil" marriage. Blow away "domestic" law. Flip it all over to contract law. Get the state out of the business of regulating what 2 (or more) adults do. You want to have a wedding ceremony in a church? Have a ball - it has no legal weight. For those who don't have lawyers to negotiate the marriage contract, have pattern contracts in the law like they do with real estate transactions. When someone breaks the contract, they break the contract - deal with it.

      While I can see how marriage is partially a contract, what is this strange impulse some on slashdot have to reduce every facet of human behavior down to tort law? There's more to life than property, after all!

      I would just keep the actual functional parts of domestic law basically the same and have the state define different types of recognized civil unions. A Marriage would be a civil union recongized by one or more religious or other social organization, but in the eyes of the law it would be the same as a civil union without additional sanctioning.

      As for children, mandate paternity tests at birth to positively identify the genetic father, and mandate that responsibility for the child lies with BOTH genetic parents, 100% each, similar to owning title on a house. Then if the people want to change their legal status later, go do it. Unfair? maybe, but nobody stuck your dick in her for you. There would be no stigma associated with taking a paternity test - it's required of everyone. And isn't it a lot better to find out that a child is not genetically yours at the start of the kids life? Rather than you, and the kid, finding out later that "Daddy" doesn't mean what tehy think it means?

      I really don't know about requiring a paternity tests at birth. I'm not totally against the idea, but not every birth happens in a hospital or midwife/birthing facility, even today. What about home birthing, which seems to have grown in popularity again. It is true that most of these children will go to the doctor fairly soon after birth, but you would at least want to have a window of time on any requirement to accomodate a families choice to have their child at home.

      Also I'm sure personal feelings vary, but is there really a huge social stigma to these tests? While the results can cause emotional turmoil, especially if there was some sort of deception involved, I've never known anyone to be denegrated, publically or privately, for simply taking the test!

  10. That can't end badly... by XDirtypunkX · · Score: 4, Funny

    Alcohol and a whole bunch of people in a vomit comet. That can't end badly at all...

    1. Re:That can't end badly... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      "I d..d..d...bwaaaaarrrrrfff..."

    2. Re:That can't end badly... by arkham6 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I actually know these two, used to play Call of Cthulhu with them.

      Anyways, I was joking with another one of their friends about this sort of thing, and he was worried that someone may puke on Richard Garriot. I replied back if that if someone did, they should say that was for Ultima IX.

  11. Don't skydiving weddings count? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    There have been skydiving weddings for a long while now. Aren't they Zero-G?

    1. Re:Don't skydiving weddings count? by orngjce223 · · Score: 1

      You forget air resistance. ;)

      --
      Note: I was 13 when I wrote most of this. Take with several grains of salt.
    2. Re:Don't skydiving weddings count? by D-Cypell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "There have been skydiving weddings for a long while now. Aren't they Zero-G?"

      Not really. In fact, most would say that gravity is a fairly fundamental part of the whole skydiving experience.

    3. Re:Don't skydiving weddings count? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Which is to say that they are just as Zero-G as THIS wedding. I think the bigger news is being married by Lord British. I guess the only way they can top this is to involve midgets and floor wax.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Don't skydiving weddings count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the steady state, skydiving is 1 G. You might be able to feel ~0.2 G for ~5 sec after you suddenly change your shape from a flat star to a vertical 'I', but that's about it.

    5. Re:Don't skydiving weddings count? by dmatos · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Once acceleration is no longer 9.8m/s^2 due to wind resistance, you feel the force of gravity. Once you've reached terminal velocity, your inner ear can't tell the difference between falling from an airplane and standing on the ground.

      --

      It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
      --Scott Adams
    6. Re:Don't skydiving weddings count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The things that differentiate this wedding from one done while skydiving are that they're doing it inside a vehicle, so they don't have the rush of air past them drowning out voices, and that they don't have to get it all done in one take -- the plane will be going back up and making several parabolic arcs. In both cases, they're falling freely in a ballistic trajectory; it is only that the aircraft they are in is following the same trajectory that makes it look as if they're floating in the cabin. You could get the same 'floating' effect by disengaging all of the safety mechanisms on an elevator and cutting the cables (except for the deceleration trauma at the end).

  12. Screw Zero-G wedding. Am looking for... by freedom_india · · Score: 1, Redundant

    ... a leaked homemade video of something like this

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  13. Go OCTOMOM 2!!! by zazenation · · Score: 1

    Now they only need 8 kids through IVF and they can have their own TV show!

  14. Re:Goatse by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Zero G" means "No Goatse" allowed, dude

  15. ACID by DirtyCanuck · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wanna have a wedding in space, spike the punch with Acid and rent an inflatable jumper (shaped like a spaceship).

  16. I thought it said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it said Zero-G Welding..

    1. Re:I thought it said... by amliebsch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Me too, and I was actually more interested in that. Does anybody know if welding has been attempted in zero-g to date?

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    2. Re:I thought it said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's actually an interesting point...

      When they go up to repair the hubble telescope or whatever else they might like to work on, do they weld it, or is it completely modular so they just replace bolted sections?

  17. don't forget, they're from New York City by SethJohnson · · Score: 1

    It's still probably cheaper than having their ceremony in New York.

    Seth

  18. Awwwww... by Draconi · · Score: 1

    Just don't try to eat the complementary M&Ms at +1.8gees, guys. A lesson learned the hard way!

  19. What about honeymoon? by antdude · · Score: 1

    And sex!

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  20. The fact that Lord British is officiating... by majorgoodvibes · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...is what's funny to me. Their marriage will only be legally recognized in Sosaria.

  21. News Duck by Co0Ps · · Score: 1

    Free fall without air resistance != Zero Gravity, stop abusing scientific terms to get media attention. It's exactly like having "the first wedding on mars", that's really just a wedding in the nasa mars simulation robot test lot.

    1. Re:News Duck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Einstein's general theory of relativity, they are the same. If not, what local experiment could you do to distinguish the two?

    2. Re:News Duck by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      Free fall without air resistance is exactly the same phenomenon as "Zero Gravity" or "Microgravity".

      In fact, orbit is exactly like this -- it is free fall. The only difference is that the trajectory takes you around the earth instead of into it.

      Yes, that is a difference worth noting, but that's more like the difference between a water bottle and a water fountain. It's still water, it's just that the bottle will run out -- the plane will have to level off (or smack into the ground).

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    3. Re:News Duck by Co0Ps · · Score: 0, Troll

      Zero gravity means no mass acceleration. And using that term in any other situation is simply incorrect. It's like calling your computer a hard drive just becouse you can't grasp the technical difernce.

    4. Re:News Duck by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 1

      Huh? I'm pretty sure thats the definition of Zero-G. If you're going to try and be pedantic, complain about it not being called microgravity... all the objects in free fall have a mutual gravitational attraction to each other, so you do end up with micro-g (~g*1e-6) levels of gravity, thus making Zero-G a misnomer.

      You'd be absolutely right if they were calling this the first space wedding. But they're not. The only difference between free-fall and microgravity is your reference frame. That understanding was one of the main things that allowed Einstein to derive general relativity from its special relative.

    5. Re:News Duck by Co0Ps · · Score: 1

      As I said to the other person and was modded troll for some reason (newb mods that use - modifiers as a method of disagreeing):

      Zero gravity means no mass acceleration. And using that term in any other situation is simply incorrect. It's like calling your computer a hard drive just becouse you can't grasp the technical diffrence.

      Saying that this is really zero g when looking in certain reference frames that involves anything in free fall without free fall is bullshit. It's the same as saying "When you're running, it's still completly valid to call it standing still, becouse you are in the same reference frame as everyone else running the same speed as you." There must be implicit conditions that apply when talking about things, or talking would take forever or be extremly confusing. When talking about someone running, you expect him to be moving with a velocity in a reference frame that also involves the big fkn planet he's standing on. The same thing applies to "Zero-g" or "Microgravity". When someone tells you that an apple accelerates with close to 0g, you expect it to be far out in space. When someone tells you that a person is running, you expect him to be moving with a velocity compared to the surface he is standing on. It's implicit. When he suddenly tells you "Ha-ha, I didn't tell you that the apples reference frame only involved itself." would you really say "Oh, why didn't I think of that. Damn you're so smart."

    6. Re:News Duck by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 1

      So in other words, according to you, microgravity conditions don't exist anywhere, the only places getting close would be the vast voids between galactic clusters? Anywhere else, you're being affected by gravity and accelerating toward a some body or another.

      Commonly, orbital conditions are referred to as zero-g. But guess what, you're in free fall there too, but your velocity is high enough that you continue to miss the planet. The only difference between the zero-g portion of a parabolic flight and an object in orbit as far as you could actually measure with an inertial measurement unit (accelerometer and gyros) is that there are sudden and drastic changes at the beginning and end of the parabola. You could only tell the difference by comparing it to something fixed (i.e. defining a reference frame), such as looking out the window. However, this doesn't make the orbiting case any more 'pure', since you are still moving and accelerating pretty fast compared to the Earth, constantly changing direction (and speed in anything but a circular orbit). Of course this all neglects acceleration relative to the Sun, galactic center, and neighboring galaxies.

      And really, I don't think I'm particularly confused on it. I'm an aerospace engineering grad student focusing on dynamics and control, with a heavy mix of orbital mechanics. While this doesn't necessarily mean I'm that smart or particularly good at much, I do think that I'm entitled to be fairly confident in my understanding of basic dynamics.

    7. Re:News Duck by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      Zero gravity means no mass acceleration.

      Except that, according to relativity, falling is a state of rest, a result of the warping of space-time. Gravity is not a force, it's just the shape of space.

      Thus, mass acceleration is what happens when you're standing on the ground, and the Earth is accelerating you upwards...

      In any case, please explain how there is somehow less "mass acceleration" in orbit than in this plane. Again, the only difference is that the plane would eventually hit the ground if it didn't level off -- but that's a difference of direction; the phenomenon is precisely the same.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  22. Save money on the space wedding and meteorite ring by nausea_malvarma · · Score: 1

    and just pay a viral-marketing team to personally give the middle finger to every poor person on earth.

  23. Zero G dress? by iamdrscience · · Score: 2, Funny

    The dress is specifically intended to be worn in zero gravity? So what, it's like vomit colored and easily washable?

  24. there's a misunderstanding here by tbj61898 · · Score: 0

    He probably meant to say "gravity is bad" referring to a pair of something completely different....

    --
    nop, nop, nop #VBLANK
  25. Good luck to them by jabjoe · · Score: 1

    If you have the money to burn, and your both of the science/extreme-sport persuasion, this is a great thing to do. Added to that, they are the first. I say good luck to them, and I hope neither is sick.

    1. Re:Good luck to them by laejoh · · Score: 0

      and I hope neither is sick.

      Perhaps both of them are of the science/extreme-sport/fetish persuasion?

  26. You lack imagination. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    Example: I doubt anyone's been married on waterskis before. Or while submerged and in Scuba gear. Or with a priest who has recently inhaled large quantities of helium.

    For that matter, you lack imagination about other reasons one might not want to be married in a church -- one might be Jewish, or Muslim, or Wiccan, or Pagan, or Buddhist, or Taoist, or Hindu, or atheist, or anything in between. Even if one is Christian, it wouldn't quite be a traditional marriage if it was between homosexuals -- and that assumes your local church will do it. And even if you're Christian and straight, and have no desire to be original, you might want to save a little money and have a smaller wedding at home with friends, or outside if it's a nice day.

    But even so, it'd be damned cool to be able to show your future kids and grandkids that your wedding is in the Guinness Book of World Records.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    1. Re:You lack imagination. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Example: I doubt anyone's been married on waterskis before. Or while submerged and in Scuba gear. Or with a priest who has recently inhaled large quantities of helium.

      I've seen more than one Scuba wedding on TV. Dunno about the other two.

    2. Re:You lack imagination. by will_die · · Score: 2, Informative

      SCUBA is common, here is a company that does them and will provide SCUBA training http://www.pensacoladivecompany.com/weddiing.html
      http://www.canadianrockies.net/weddings/weddings-in-canmore-and-banff-alberta-mixing-marriage-and-pleasure-in-the-canadian-rockies.html does skis, also white water rafting boat, along with other.
      I give up and will give you the helium sucking priest. You are the second search result for this on Google.

    3. Re:You lack imagination. by edgr · · Score: 1

      Example: I doubt anyone's been married on waterskis before. Or while submerged and in Scuba gear.

      You could at least have come up with some better examples: Wedding on waterskis, Underwater wedding

    4. Re:You lack imagination. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But even so, it'd be damned cool to be able to show your future kids and grandkids that your wedding is in the Guinness Book of World Records.

      Seems rather narcissistic to me. Why not simply show your future kids and grandkids that you defied odds & most expectations and actually stayed married to, faithful to, and happy with their mother/grandmother for 50 years?

      Seems to me that living well would be a much bigger deal than a sentence in some book that is largely comprised of a latter-day freakshow. Do you really want to find the listing for your wedding between the entry for the man with the world's longest pubic hair and the entry about the woman who holds the world record for eating the most hot dogs in 60 seconds?

    5. Re:You lack imagination. by genner · · Score: 1

      Example: I doubt anyone's been married on waterskis before. Or while submerged and in Scuba gear.

      Waterski wedding
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwkJymK71g4


      Suba Wedding
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-_GFQ0JST0


      Everything else has probly been done too. Google for yourself.

    6. Re:You lack imagination. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I could've picked some better examples.

      Hey, I'll steal one: Since wetriffs turned out to be a new idea, how about getting married while showering with electric guitars? Or, since showers are impractical, do that under a waterfall?

      Point is, I was able to pull three ideas out of my ass, one of which you can't find an example of. And there's a fourth.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  27. Lets face it it won't be the 1st time by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

    someone vomits at a wedding

    --

    Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  28. the sh.. we burn our fossils for... by bostei2008 · · Score: 1

    Sometimes I am afraid we burn away our ability to bootstrap our civilization to space.

    But then, maybe space tourism fuels public interest in space exploration.

    1. Re:the sh.. we burn our fossils for... by maxume · · Score: 1

      It isn't that big a deal to synthesize hydrocarbons (well, as long as you have some energy). Fossil fuels don't have anywhere near the energy density required to 'bootstrap our civilization to space' anyway.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  29. Hope they dont get sick! by cyman777 · · Score: 1

    So if 45% of people get sick, either bride or groom or the minister will not make it through the ceremony... Qute from our beloved Wikipedia: The most common problem experienced by humans in the initial hours of weightlessness is known as space adaptation syndrome or SAS, commonly referred to as space sickness. Symptoms of SAS include nausea and vomiting, vertigo, headaches, lethargy, and overall malaise. The first case of SAS was reported by cosmonaut Gherman Titov in 1961. Since then, roughly 45% of all people who have flown in space have suffered from this condition. The duration of space sickness varies, but in no case has it lasted for more than 72 hours, after which the body adjusts to the new environment. NASA jokingly measures SAS using the "Garn scale", named for United States Senator Jake Garn, whose SAS during STS-51-D was the worst on record. Accordingly, one "Garn" is equivalent to the most severe possible case of SAS.[13] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weightlessness

  30. The full story from Erin & Noah by realinvalidname · · Score: 1

    These two are anime / sci-fi podcasters, whose show is called the Ninja Consultants. They discuss their wedding plans and how they're pulling it together in an April episode. They're pretty cool people (I met them at Anime Weekend Atlanta a few times): Erin worked on a couple of animated series and writes for Otaku USA.

    1. Re:The full story from Erin & Noah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Great. Weeaboos in space.

  31. Cool, two stories on /. Married by Garriot by Gr0kThis · · Score: 1

    So I was reading this because I would love to go up in the "Vomit Comet" and found that Richard Garriot actually owns a lunar lander and rover the Russians sold to him. The story about preserving moon landings references the Russian lunar missions.

    So based on international treaty no government can lay claim to anything on the moon nor the moon itself as property. But Garriot is the first private person, that I know of, to have property on the moon and actually has the first step in claiming his own lunar plot.

    Thats synergy!

  32. I now pronounce you...blllleeeecccchhhhhh!!!!! by Trip6 · · Score: 1

    I hope they understand that the first instinct in zero Gs is to hurl!

    --
    I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
  33. Damn it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With relatively few states accepting gay marriage (and none in NY, though they'll recognize them if the wedding was performed somewhere else where it is allowed), this just has to be the christians flipping us off.

  34. underwater scuba-suit wedding - essentially zero-G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will bet that there have been several underwater scuba-suit weddings before. It is essentially a zero-G environment once you have neutral buoyancy.

  35. Zero-G dress? by theoriginalturtle · · Score: 1

    What the hell fun is THAT? I mean, this is the best thing since Girls On Trampolines, and they design a dress to defeat the most intriguing part.

    --
    ---------------------------------------
    Rotate the pod, please, HAL....
  36. What about the honeymoon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wedding? That is boring. Now the honeymoon would be interesting.

  37. And what about the proposal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did he propose to her by writing "Will You Marry Me?" on the moon with a giant ray gun? Or maybe it was something from this list of geeky proposals?

    Of all the geeky marriage ideas, it seems the more money you put towards them the better your chances of attracting attention

  38. Zero G by Zygamorph · · Score: 1

    Depends on what you mean by Zero G. If you mean there is no ( or very little) gravity at your location then you are out of luck with all of this nonsense. If you mean free fall, I.E. you are accelerating at the same value as the local gravity field then the first part of sky diving before you reach terminal velocity would be pretty close as would a diving air plane, being in orbit and some roller coasters.