Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 140 posts

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#11

Post by IncreasePosts »

hinkley wrote: post #8
delichon wrote: post #2

> I propose that we all agree to ban all permanent lunar development that is visible with the naked eye from Earth. ...with no proposal to weigh the value of the development against against the value of good taste or nebulously defined compassion. To suppose that no such development with greater value is possible betrays a poverty of imagination. IMHO it is authoritarian to constrain the actions of others on the basi…

If I build an ugly house that affects fifty people. If I build an ugly moon base that affects 8 billion people.

Your ugly moon base would need to be how many thousands of square miles to be visible from earth?

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#12

Post by WalterBright »

> so why not agree to leave it unmarred by any obvious act of humanity, forevermore?

How some people hate humanity. Personally, I'd love to see the lights from a lunar colony on the moon.

This reminds me of the people who don't want to "pollute" Mars. Sheesh, it's a dead rock. There is no environment to pollute. It could desperately use people on it, just like the moon.

The solar system is ours, and we can and should do what we want to it. Not cower in self-hatred and loathing.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#13

Post by mquander »

BobAliceInATree wrote: post #10
Simon_ORourke wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all well and good to be buried on the moon, but hopefully the author's descendants are not left with the tab for the funeral.

We're all left with the tab, that tab being the enormous amount of greenhouse gases it takes to lift even a gram of matter into space. Maybe there will be one day in the far future when we've reversed climate change and reached an equilibrium, we can safely bury people on the moon, but let's not start it now.

This is inaccurate because if you take the high end of the Falcon 9 per-launch emissions estimates discussed in this thread (about 28k metric tons equivalent of CO2) and divide by the payload size (about 17 metric tons) then each gram of matter lifted into space would be taking about 1.5 kilograms of CO2-equivalent emissions, which is a small amount instead of an enormous amount.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41519623

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#14

Post by thrance »

How much carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere for a single rocket launch? How much labor and natural resources does it cost?

I think it's extremely selfish to expect others to expend so much energy and time to carry your remains so far away, when you wouldn't know the difference.

I also think seeing night lights from a city on the moon would be pretty cool.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#15

Post by BobAliceInATree »

mquander wrote: post #13
BobAliceInATree wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're all left with the tab, that tab being the enormous amount of greenhouse gases it takes to lift even a gram of matter into space. Maybe there will be one day in the far future when we've reversed climate change and reached an equilibrium, we can safely bury people on the moon, but let's not start it now.

This is inaccurate because if you take the high end of the Falcon 9 per-launch emissions estimates discussed in this thread (about 28k metric tons equivalent of CO2) and divide by the payload size (about 17 metric tons) then each gram of matter lifted into space would be taking about 1.5 kilograms of CO2-equivalent emissions, which is a small amount instead of an enormous amount. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=…

For 1-gram of material, that's a lot, now that we just shattered 1.5ºC global temperate gain, especially for something pointless.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#16

Post by hinkley »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #11
hinkley wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I build an ugly house that affects fifty people. If I build an ugly moon base that affects 8 billion people.

Your ugly moon base would need to be how many thousands of square miles to be visible from earth?

I think you’re confusing a NASA base with inhabitation. Inhabitation means geometric structures, lights, and disturbance of the immediate environment.

What conversation do you think you’re in? You going to put cemeteries on the moon without people living there? How would that make sense just from the rocket equation?

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#17

Post by vacuity »

WalterBright wrote: post #12

> so why not agree to leave it unmarred by any obvious act of humanity, forevermore? How some people hate humanity. Personally, I'd love to see the lights from a lunar colony on the moon. This reminds me of the people who don't want to "pollute" Mars. Sheesh, it's a dead rock. There is no environment to pollute. It could desperately use people on it, just like the moon. The solar system is ours, and we can and should…

Is it an act of hatred to say that humans shouldn't expend huge amounts of effort and energy to try to populate Mars so that humans can escape the very human act of polluting the Earth? When this human pollution kills millions a year and plenty of other organisms? Is it a celebration of humanity to continue buying chocolate or clothing or rugs, even if they are clearly the result of exploited or downright slave labor?

Or is it just that you suppose that we, as humans who have privilege and comfort, deserve to continue and expand those qualities? You "personally" want to see lights from the moon? You think Mars "desperately" needs habitation? I'm not sure how you're any less self-important about this topic than your opposition.

I'm not really sure what you mean when you say "humanity", because it sure doesn't seem like the same kind of "humanity" that MLK Jr. described. I'm sure there are plenty of people you could speak for. Don't presume that's everyone worth considering.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#18

Post by zbrozek »

generic92034 wrote: post #6
delichon wrote: post #2

> I propose that we all agree to ban all permanent lunar development that is visible with the naked eye from Earth. ...with no proposal to weigh the value of the development against against the value of good taste or nebulously defined compassion. To suppose that no such development with greater value is possible betrays a poverty of imagination. IMHO it is authoritarian to constrain the actions of others on the basi…

> IMHO it is authoritarian to constrain the actions of others on the basis of taste and beauty. Clearly, a lot of people feel differently in various settings. For example NIMBY groups, HOAs, landscape or monument protection laws. The list never stops, really.

Yeah, and they ought to be told to stuff it. I don't know why they deserve all the pandering that they get.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#20

Post by s1artibartfast »

vacuity wrote: post #17
WalterBright wrote: post #12

> so why not agree to leave it unmarred by any obvious act of humanity, forevermore? How some people hate humanity. Personally, I'd love to see the lights from a lunar colony on the moon. This reminds me of the people who don't want to "pollute" Mars. Sheesh, it's a dead rock. There is no environment to pollute. It could desperately use people on it, just like the moon. The solar system is ours, and we can and should…

Is it an act of hatred to say that humans shouldn't expend huge amounts of effort and energy to try to populate Mars so that humans can escape the very human act of polluting the Earth? When this human pollution kills millions a year and plenty of other organisms? Is it a celebration of humanity to continue buying chocolate or clothing or rugs, even if they are clearly the result of exploited or downright slave labor…

Why not both populate Mars and improve earth? I dont think they are mutually exclusive.
Post reply on HN