Death in Space

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/09/02/death-in-space.html

by ygd • 16 years ago

64 62 16 years ago

edge17• 16 years ago

where is that background image from?

wazoox• 16 years ago

I find quite absurd the concept of bringing back home the explorer's dead body. Seamen traditionally are buried at sea, it seems quite obvious that the right thing to do for a space explorer is to be made a permanent asteroid.

Tichy2• 16 years ago

Rationally it doesn't make a difference, but if buried at sea, your body can be absorbed by earth and become part of the next cycle of life.

ZenzerNet• 16 years ago

Had it been me, I'd prefer to be shot into space. In a zillion years, there's a miniscule chance to be discovered by another species. In the at least, I'll eventually turn into stardust and become part of another cycle of magnificient mystery in the universe.

Isn't that thought more tantalizing than being buried on Earth?

rbanffy2• 16 years ago

The problem then is that, while a dead seamen doesn't pose a threat to the ship, in the case of a dead astronaut, you must be sure the body's trajectory won't intersect your own at any significant speed.

JoeAltmaier3• 16 years ago

It cannot intersect your own at significant speed, unless you expend significant energy to diverge your trajectory. Otherwise it simply continues to accompany you at some slightly varying distance.

wlievens4• 16 years ago

Space is really, really, really big.

prodigal_erik• 16 years ago

Seems a shame to deliberately destroy the frozen body, when there are people back on earth paying to be vitrified and kept artificially frozen for a chance (however small) of resurrection. And I would think an explorer would prefer a tombstone as a last mark on the new world.

patio112• 16 years ago

There is nothing on Mars worth dying for. Build the lander if you must, let the defense contractors collect their contracts, then blow it up on the launchpad. All objectives accomplished, everyone goes home to their families.

tomjen33• 16 years ago

There may not be much on Mars worth dying for for you, but there are people who have died for a lot less glory than landing on a new planet.

Let each choose his own.

patio112• 16 years ago

I'd be more sympathetic if I didn't have to pay for them to die gloriously. Not much more sympathetic, granted.

tdfx2• 16 years ago

We're on borrowed time on this particular rock. I think the continued existence of the human race is a pursuit worth dying for.

petercooper3• 16 years ago

I agree, though I see no harm in waiting a bit. Going to Mars soon feels like an attempt to build a billion dollar supercomputer in 1979. Technology useful for space missions moves slower than computers alone, but I can't help but think that in just 50 years we'd be far more prepared if we diverted today's Mars cash into robotic space exploration and, particularly, space mining research.

billswift2• 16 years ago

http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Must-Colonize-Space/lm/15QM4CUB...

http://www.sylviaengdahl.com/space.htm

http://www.sylviaengdahl.com/space/survival.htm

http://www.sylviaengdahl.com/space/lifeboat.htm

c1sc03• 16 years ago

"There is nothing on Mars worth dying for." And this is exactly what is wrong with society right now. We have become so accustomed to our little comforts that we have become completely risk-averse. I'll take an opposing viewpoint and say that it's worth dying for "just because it's there" to paraphrase Sir Edmund Hillary.

auxbuss2• 16 years ago

It was George Mallory who allegedly replied, "Because it's there!" to the question "Why do you want to climb Mount Everest?".

JoeAltmaier3• 16 years ago

People don't assume great risk to die; they do it to truly live.

Give up and hide in your cave, and you are dead already.

wlievens4• 16 years ago

This might just be the very first time I saw you downvoted.

I sincerely disagree. The only valid question is whether the time is right - that's something you can argue about.

tomjen33• 16 years ago

It seems wrong to return the body - wouldn't it be better to bury it where it died (if on Mars) or send it into space ala Star Trek (complete with bagpipes).

That would have been my choice anyway.

pascalchristian• 16 years ago

Reminds me of this proposal: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/669/1

One man, one way to Mars. There's no need to carry a body then.

jiganti• 16 years ago

I'm surprised that anyone willing to risk a mission to mars wouldn't be satisfied with the glory alone of attempting such a mission. I suppose the religious reasons are what would motivate people to want this.

tdfx2• 16 years ago

I'm always amazed at the amount of thought that people seem to put into the handling of their bodies after they're dead. Elaborate rituals and strange requests that provide no benefit to them and only seem to inconvenience the people who are in fact still alive.

mfukar• 16 years ago

Posthumous fame: we all want it, always did, always will.

joshuacc2• 16 years ago

This makes sense in many religious contexts. For instance, traditional Christianity asserts belief in the "resurrection of the body." This implies that the body isn't a mere shell to be cast off, but is actually part of what made the person who they are, and is worthy of respect. Thus you have saints relics in Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

I assume that other religions offer explanatory contexts for their rituals as well. These may or not make sense when transferred to a modern secular society.

allenp3• 16 years ago

I think it is important to note that ceremonial burial was practiced by archaic secular societies as well - including Neanderthals. I think that we need some sort of group activity to help us transition to new situations - ie graduations, weddings, funerals, in Japan there are now wedding-like ceremonies for divorce with both families attending.

I think at its basic level there is something along these lines: change is uncertain, the group is here to witness the change and the group is not startled, I'm ok because the group is ok.

skmurphy• 16 years ago

What if the dead body is your mother, your husband, your son, your sister? Traditions provide structure for grief and are of considerable benefit.

JoeAltmaier3• 16 years ago

Sentiment. Darn those inconvenient old emotions.

jimbokun2• 16 years ago

"Elaborate rituals and strange requests that provide no benefit to them and only seem to inconvenience the people who are in fact still alive."

Exactly the other way round. The rituals are solely for the benefit of those still living to better deal with their grief and loss.

I suppose strange requests could become an inconvenience. But Hunter Thompson's request that he be sent up as fireworks for his friends to observe and enjoy, for example, seems less an inconvenience and more a thoughtful gesture to those he left behind.

So it all depends on the request, I guess.

khafra2• 16 years ago

Do people's desires expire when they do? If we do not call irrational a will directing someone's worldly goods to his descendents, why would we call irrational Hunter S. Thompson's wish to be shot out of a giant cannon?

DanielBMarkham• 16 years ago

I certainly hope we're not spending a lot of money on death-in-space scenarios.

Wrap the body up, strap a 4-kilo rocket on it, say some nice words, and off she goes. No new technology or engineering required.

Unfair question, but it's how I feel: Does NASA always have to have some great new over-engineered plan for every little new thing they come across?

billswift2• 16 years ago

Of course they do. NASA doesn't actually do anything but make plans any more - so the more elaborate and wasteful their plan-making is, the more money they can try to claim from congress.

pclark• 16 years ago

This doesn't seem any more over engineered than the US Military philosophy of always recovering fallen soldiers and bringing them home. (I like it)

dalore2• 16 years ago

You might want to reclaim the bodies water first, ala Dune.

sprout• 16 years ago

This could actually be useful for a mission to Mars. Every bit of biomass available for a biodome (if such a thing could be maintained) would be vital.

jdietrich• 16 years ago

I think the author is underestimating the psychology of astronauts. We often think of them as some kind of scientist or explorer but in fact they are an elite military force, made up of the sort of men that we would expect to fly dangerously unpredictable test aircraft.

Anyone being sent into space is well aware that they have about a one-in-twenty chance of not coming back. They are selected and trained on the understanding that if they become unwell in space, they could jeopardise the lives of their fellow crewmen.

Repatriation of remains is an unaffordable luxury in space and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future. No-one with the constitution to be an astronaut would allow their own death to hamper a mission.

As to whether Mars is worth dying for - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/390933.stm

Death in Space

Related Stories