Late Astronauts Fly In Space Without Medical Certificate

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
Why do you find that phrase significant justification for launching
incinerated human remains into space aboard a publicly funded
scientific mission?

There is a very clear connection between the space mission, and the person
traveling along with it. I don't understand why you aren't comprehending
that, but whatever.

I see absolutely no reason that science needs to be completely devoid of
all
human influence. Sentimentalism is just as valid a reason for doing
something as anything else, IMHO.

Really? I much prefer to separate objective and subjective rationale.

The two cannot co-exist in your life? Pity.

Imagine the impact of permitting emotionalism guide your operation of
an automobile. It's inappropriate if the intent is to arrive safely
at your destination.

No one is talking about "emotionalism" guiding the operation. Straw man,
red herring, your pick.

As a fellow pilot, you are not afforded the luxury of indulging
emotional and sentimental feelings while performing the requirements
of your flight missions.

I most certainly am. Practically every flight I make includes the
indulgence of emotional and sentimental feelings while performing the
requirements of my flight missions.

Again, perhaps yours do not. I pity you.

Imagine the outcome if you were to say, I
really love the sight of cumulonimbus clouds; let's get a closer look.

And?

I'm not paying for the comments you mention, but we are all paying for
NASA's decision to include incinerated human remains aboard this
mission to Pluto.

I doubt that the inclusion of one person's ashes on the Pluto mission
represent ANY significant additional expenditure on your part.

What will NASA do if the discoverer of the next
planet to which they decide to send a spacecraft has chosen not to be
cremated? Will they send rotten human flesh into space at our
expense? Where will this dubious practice lead?

IMHO, your above scenario is a clear example of why your outrage is
misplaced. The reason ashes are included is that they are an
inconsequential payload. It's absurd to think that NASA is going to start
carrying complete human bodies just for the sake of being sentimental.

This whole concept of flying ashes sets a bad precedent, IMO.

You are welcome to your opinion, however misplaced it may be.

[...]
If I have no such need nor desire, does that make me less human? Isn't
it just a little presumptuous on the part of the NASA decision maker?

The NASA decision maker is not making decisions for your satisfaction alone.
As far as your humanity goes, it does seem that's in question at this point.
However, each human individual is different. You are welcome to ignore
your emotional inclinations, or to discard them entirely, but when you start
trying to impose your attitudes and preferences on the rest of the human
race, you are set for trouble. The vast majority of humanity is quite
content in their irrational behaviors, and there are even those of us who
*recognize* certain irrationalities even as we acknowledge their value.

If pilots routinely made such concessions to such emotional desires,
they'd be poorer pilots, IMO.

Negative on that. Aviation is filled with concessions to emotional desires,
and most of the time it has absolutely no effect on safety or competence.

Pete

Aviation is filled with concessions to emotional desires,
and most of the time it has absolutely no effect on safety or competence.

Pete


I've got to thank you for that phrase. You've got a nice touch.

Mike Weller

I'm re-reading a book "I Could Never Be So Lucky Again"

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

Snipola
I'm not paying for the comments you mention, but we are all paying for
NASA's decision to include incinerated human remains aboard this
mission to Pluto. What will NASA do if the discoverer of the next
planet to which they decide to send a spacecraft has chosen not to be
cremated? Will they send rotten human flesh into space at our
expense? Where will this dubious practice lead?
Snipola

I have to ask, how much do you think it is costing *YOU* to add
those ashes on the mission?

Here's a suggestion. Why not email NASA and ask them for details
about the how much extra it costs placing those ashes on the craft
for each each tax payer.

How much does the craft weigh?

How much do the ashes weigh?

What is the total cost of the mission?

From that you should be able to figure out the cost of the ashes.

Then spread that out over all the taxpayers.

I'd be astonished if it cost more than a penny per person.

I bet somewhere in NASA there is already a document covering this.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Skywise wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

Snipola
I'm not paying for the comments you mention, but we are all paying for
NASA's decision to include incinerated human remains aboard this
mission to Pluto. What will NASA do if the discoverer of the next
planet to which they decide to send a spacecraft has chosen not to be
cremated? Will they send rotten human flesh into space at our
expense? Where will this dubious practice lead?
Snipola

I have to ask, how much do you think it is costing *YOU* to add
those ashes on the mission?

Here's a suggestion. Why not email NASA and ask them for details
about the how much extra it costs placing those ashes on the craft
for each each tax payer.

How much does the craft weigh?

How much do the ashes weigh?

What is the total cost of the mission?

From that you should be able to figure out the cost of the ashes.

Then spread that out over all the taxpayers.

I'd be astonished if it cost more than a penny per person.

I bet somewhere in NASA there is already a document covering this.

Brian

Following up on this...

From the Launch Press Kit at (top right corner):
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/ne...ews/index.html

Mission cost: $700 million
Space craft weight: 478 kg

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populat..._United_States

Population of US, December 2005: 298 million (estimate)

Cost per person per gram of weight: .00049 cents

In my brief search I found no informaiton on exactly how
much of Clyde's remains were on board, but I doubt is was
even as much as a gram.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Skywise" wrote

Here's a suggestion. Why not email NASA and ask them for details
about the how much extra it costs placing those ashes on the craft
for each each tax payer.

I would suggest that there is no additional cost. The launch vehicle is
capable of launching x number of pounds. If the launch weight of the
vehicle is under that weight, you could fill up the rest of the vehicle with
tire weights and launch it, and it would not cost any more to launch.
--
Jim in NC

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:27:24 -0000, Skywise
wrote in
::

Skywise wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

Snipola
I'm not paying for the comments you mention, but we are all paying for
NASA's decision to include incinerated human remains aboard this
mission to Pluto. What will NASA do if the discoverer of the next
planet to which they decide to send a spacecraft has chosen not to be
cremated? Will they send rotten human flesh into space at our
expense? Where will this dubious practice lead?
Snipola


From the Launch Press Kit at (top right corner):
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/ne...ews/index.html

Mission cost: $700 million
Space craft weight: 478 kg

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populat..._United_States

Population of US, December 2005: 298 million (estimate)

Cost per person per gram of weight: .00049 cents

In my brief search I found no informaiton on exactly how
much of Clyde's remains were on board, but I doubt is was
even as much as a gram.


So your thesis is, that as long as the per capita amount of tax money
misappropriated by NASA is small, that sort of malfeasance is
acceptable?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
So your thesis is, that as long as the per capita amount of tax money
misappropriated by NASA is small, that sort of malfeasance is
acceptable?

I doubt that's his thesis. My guess is that, as with mine, the question is
how much YOU are paying. YOU are the one complaining. Many taxpayers are
satisfied with how their money is being spent.

I don't know why "Skywise" thinks the ashes are less than a gram (about a
teaspoon, I'd guess?), but I agree they are not heavy. My grandfather's
ashes didn't weigh even a kilogram, if I recall correctly. They definitely
weren't as heavy as two kilograms. Using Skywise's numbers, that puts the
cost at still under a penny (just as he guessed).

Even if I were bothered by the concept of someone's ashes riding along to
Pluto, a half-cent misappropriation of my tax dollars by the US government
is a drop in the bucket compared to the other things they spend money on and
which I object to. When the stuff that's tens and hundreds of my dollars is
dealt with, then I would consider worrying about the half-cent problems.

IMHO, it's pretty irrational and not at all scientist-like to fixate on such
a teensy tiny issue when the huge elephant-sized ones are still unresolved.

Pete

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 23:50:56 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

IMHO, it's pretty irrational and not at all scientist-like to fixate on such
a teensy tiny issue when the huge elephant-sized ones are still unresolved.

Pete


It costs around $100,000 per pound of any kind of matter to be put
into low earth orbit. A quarter of a pounder steak costs about
$25,000.

But, We "THINK", and for that reason, it is a good thing for us to go
there.

Mike Weller

"Peter Duniho" wrote in
:

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
So your thesis is, that as long as the per capita amount of tax money
misappropriated by NASA is small, that sort of malfeasance is
acceptable?

I doubt that's his thesis. My guess is that, as with mine, the question
is how much YOU are paying. YOU are the one complaining. Many
taxpayers are satisfied with how their money is being spent.

BINGO!!!


I don't know why "Skywise" thinks the ashes are less than a gram (about
a teaspoon, I'd guess?), but I agree they are not heavy. My
grandfather's ashes didn't weigh even a kilogram, if I recall correctly.
They definitely weren't as heavy as two kilograms. Using Skywise's
numbers, that puts the cost at still under a penny (just as he guessed).
Snipola

I had done further research as I had no idea how much is left after
cremation. According the wikipedia article on the subject, about 5%
of the orignal mass is left, so given a 200lb person that worked out
to a few kilo's max.

I conjectured that less than a gram is on board because all the
confirming statements about the presence of said ashes state "a
portion of" his ashes are on board. That clearly indicates that not
all of his ashes are flying, but probably just a representative
small sample for the purpose of honoring the man who discovered
Pluto. There's no need to carry much. It's a symbol of honor.

So, shall we move on to the issue of the digital disc carried on
the Cassini spacecraft with the digitized signatures of hundreds
of thousands of people? (including myself) IIRC there's a similar
disc on New Horizons as well.

Yep, according to: http://www.space.com/astronotes/astronotes.html

...the New Horizons spacecraft bound for Pluto is toting a
number of items, including a U.S. flag, as well as a compact
disc containing more than 430,000 names.

And

...a piece of SpaceShipOne

No, Larry, I think you're missing the point of all these things
that are flown on these craft. These symbols are useful because
it gives the average joe blow (or jane) something to connect with.
99% of people don't understand the significance of exploring these
worlds and spending all this money. By giving people some way of
connecting themselves personally to these missions, they feel more
involved. Perhaps it's nothing more than PR BS, but if it means
getting more people aware of the importance of doing this kind of
science, I'm all for it.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:38:14 -0000, Skywise
wrote in
::

"Peter Duniho" wrote in
:

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
So your thesis is, that as long as the per capita amount of tax money
misappropriated by NASA is small, that sort of malfeasance is
acceptable?

I doubt that's his thesis. My guess is that, as with mine, the question
is how much YOU are paying. YOU are the one complaining. Many
taxpayers are satisfied with how their money is being spent.

BINGO!!!


That point of view is like asserting the cost of a home is the value
of a single mortgage payment . The cost to taxpayers is clearly the
entire additional sum (if any) resulting from the inclusion
(preparation, testing, launch, ...) of the ashes aboard the New
Horizons mission to Pluto.


I don't know why "Skywise" thinks the ashes are less than a gram (about
a teaspoon, I'd guess?), but I agree they are not heavy. My
grandfather's ashes didn't weigh even a kilogram, if I recall correctly.
They definitely weren't as heavy as two kilograms. Using Skywise's
numbers, that puts the cost at still under a penny (just as he guessed).
Snipola

I had done further research as I had no idea how much is left after
cremation. According the wikipedia article on the subject, about 5%
of the orignal mass is left, so given a 200lb person that worked out
to a few kilo's max.

It works out to less than 5 kilograms, but sheds no light on the
weight of the ashes aboard.

I conjectured that less than a gram is on board because all the
confirming statements about the presence of said ashes state "a
portion of" his ashes are on board. That clearly indicates that not
all of his ashes are flying, but probably just a representative
small sample for the purpose of honoring the man who discovered
Pluto. There's no need to carry much. It's a symbol of honor.

While I agree, that the amount is probably small, I don't think the
data you cite supports that, as any amount less than the entire amount
of ashes would be considered a 'portion'.

So, shall we move on to the issue of the digital disc carried on
the Cassini spacecraft with the digitized signatures of hundreds
of thousands of people? (including myself) IIRC there's a similar
disc on New Horizons as well.

Yep, according to: http://www.space.com/astronotes/astronotes.html

...the New Horizons spacecraft bound for Pluto is toting a
number of items, including a U.S. flag, as well as a compact
disc containing more than 430,000 names.

And

...a piece of SpaceShipOne


I'm flabbergasted to learn this.

No, Larry, I think you're missing the point of all these things
that are flown on these craft. These symbols are useful because
it gives the average joe blow (or jane) something to connect with.

Yeah. It finally began to dawn on me that that is the only plausible
explanation.

99% of people don't understand the significance of exploring these
worlds and spending all this money. By giving people some way of
connecting themselves personally to these missions, they feel more
involved. Perhaps it's nothing more than PR BS, but if it means
getting more people aware of the importance of doing this kind of
science, I'm all for it.


If it works in keeping the research funded, it's difficult argue
against the practice. But I still feel uneasy about it.

This may sound strange, but it has occurred to me, that the New
Horizons spacecraft will travel the cosmos for perhaps billions of
years. While the odds of an alien life form, with the intelligence to
at least understand what the probe is, are remote, what would you
think of a race of organisms that chose to include the charred remains
of a representative of their species aboard an otherwise completely
functional piece of mechanical equipment?

To me it just seems an anachronism, an act appropriate for stone age
beings, not those sufficiently advanced to achieve such a
technological feat. But given the longs odds and funding
requirements, I believe I've come accept it.