[Geof]

From Agence France-Presse (Whatever happened to Reuters?)

An Australian scientist called Wednesday for an end to the age-old tradition of cremation, saying the practice contributed to global warming. Incinerating one body can produce more than 50 kilograms of carbon dioxide.
...people could help the environment by being buried in a cardboard box under a tree. The decomposing bodies would provide the tree with nutrients and the tree would convert carbon dioxide into life-giving oxygen for decades.....what a shame to be cremated when you go up in a big bubble of carbon dioxide...Why waste all that carbon dioxide on your death?....it would not be a bad idea to bequeath one's body as food for a forest....You can actually do, after your death, an enormous amount of good for the planet....

The guy is a Reproductive Biologist which maybe explains why he doesn't seem to realise that it does not matter whether some is burnt or just decomposes naturally the same amount of CO2 is produced. But he got his name in newspapers worldwide.

[ImanCarrot]

Undoubtedly he ended his report with something along the lines of "however, much more research needs to be done into the subject.. and I'm the person to do it... give me lots of money".

The carbon from the tree would eventualy be given up.. unless we buried the tree too... in fact, perhaps we could get all the old trees and dead people, then use a high pressure industrial press to create oil.. I may sell that idea to Shell Oil hehe. We could power the press by tethering miles long wires attached to satelites- the wire would pass through the earth's magnetic field generating free electricity according to some physicists left hand rule of something.. but I need to research it more- can I have some money please?

[Geof]

......We could power the press by tethering miles long wires attached to satelites- the wire would pass through the earth's magnetic field generating free electricity according to some physicists left hand rule of something.. but I need to research it more- can I have some money please?

This does need more research:

The satellite would have to be geostationary or the wire would wrap around the earth and reel the satellite in.

Therefore the satellite, wire and earth rotate as a single unit.

Therefore the wire is not moving relative to the magnetic field of the earth.

Therefore no free electricity?

[martinw]

This does need more research:

The satellite would have to be geostationary or the wire would wrap around the earth and reel the satellite in.

Therefore the satellite, wire and earth rotate as a single unit.

Therefore the wire is not moving relative to the magnetic field of the earth.

Therefore no free electricity?

Dear Geof,

I think that the answer is to repeatedly re-deploy the satellite in a non-geostationary orbit. This would have two benefits..

1) electricity would be generated because the wire would be moving relative to the earth's magnet field

2) the huge amount of force available when the satellite collides with the earth's surface could be used directly to power the ...er....oil press.


Best wishes


Martin

[fizzissist]

.... Incinerating one body can produce more than 50 kilograms of carbon dioxide.
.........The decomposing bodies would provide the tree with nutrients and the tree would convert carbon dioxide into life-giving oxygen for decades.........[/I][/B]

Decomposition results in CO2 AND....????? Decomposition is a net benefit?? The next logical step in this direction is that we grind up the bodies and use them for fertilizer.

"Hey Mom! These home-growed tomatoes are YUMMY!! I never dreamed gramma would be so tasty!"

[sdantonio]

Decomposition results in CO2 AND....????? Decomposition is a net benefit?? The next logical step in this direction is that we grind up the bodies and use them for fertilizer.

"Hey Mom! These home-growed tomatoes are YUMMY!! I never dreamed gramma would be so tasty!"

Watch the old science fiction film Soylent Green, tasefully done. One step beyond fertilizer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green

[fizzissist]

Perfect Tommy: Emilio Lizardo. Wasn't he on TV once?
Buckaroo Banzai: You're thinking of Mr. Wizard.
Reno: Emilio Lizardo is a top scientist, dummkopf.
Perfect Tommy: So was Mr. Wizard.

RIP Mr. Wizard. The good news is you've been replaced by Bill Nye.

[sdantonio]

Perfect Tommy: [I]Emilio Lizardo. ...

Great movie. One of the best

[ImanCarrot]

The satellite would have to be geostationary or the wire would wrap around the earth and reel the satellite in.

Damn, I was hoping no-one would notice that... ok, my preliminary research (which needs more funding) has revealed that two satellites in non- geostationary orbits, one say 1 km above the other and linked by several wires would produce electricity. [edit] or even 3 or 4 linked horizontaly like a bolas[/edit]

The "dead press" could be situated on the lower satelite [edit] or the centre of the "bolas"[/edit] and the oil dispensed directly as "oil rain", or passed to a geostationary satelite and...

Getting the dead stuff up into orbit could be problematic, however I beleive our crack team (of one) have devised a unique solution in using a geostationary satelite with 1 tonne of collected oil from the "dead press" (TM) attached to a steel cable loop and pulley down to the ground... attach 1 tonne of dead stuff to the other end of the loop and reel it in. Because the weights in both sides of the loop are equal it should cost not a lot of energy...

You could also replace some of the "dead" weight by live tourists and charge them a fortune.

My head hurts...

[sdantonio]

Ok, see if this helps or is it more confusing?

[sdantonio]

Oh yeah, regarding E=1/2MV^2

More importantly there is the law of conservation of momentum (p=MV)

momentum has to stay constant unless the planet is acted on by some perturbing force (like being hit by an asteroid or something big like that).

If mass increases then velocity has to decrease for momentum to stay the same, and momentum must stay the same. Momentum is what keeps the planet trying to go wizzing off into space. Gravity is what is trying to pull it into the sun. When they are balanced you have a stable orbit.

Now, if the earth collected enough dust to double in mass, then conservation of momentum says it's velocity much reduce to half making for a much longer year, but momentum remains constant. So the orbital distance stays the same (no difference in gravity pulling it in or momentum pulling it out).

that may help a bit too.

[martinw]

More importantly there is the law of conservation of momentum (p=MV)

momentum has to stay constant unless the planet is acted on by some perturbing force (like being hit by an asteroid or something big like that).

.

Dear Steven,

Thank-you for your help.

You say that momentum has to stay constant. Presumably this only applies within a closed system. By coming from outside the system, the asteroid provides a force to change the net amount of momentum.

Is this right?

Thanks

Best wishes

Martin

[sdantonio]

Dear Steven,

Thank-you for your help.

You say that momentum has to stay constant. Presumably this only applies within a closed system. By coming from outside the system, the asteroid provides a force to change the net amount of momentum.

Is this right?

Thanks

Best wishes

Martin

Yes, correct. Actually it's one of Newton's laws (#2 I think). An objects motion will remain constant unless acted upon by an outside force.

[martinw]

Yes, correct. Actually it's one of Newton's laws (#2 I think). An objects motion will remain constant unless acted upon by an outside force.

Dear Steven,

Thanks again.

OK, so if we start exporting "stuff" from the Earth to a position outside the Solar system, what happens to the Earth's orbit round the Sun?

Best wishes,

Martin

[sdantonio]

Dear Steven,

Thanks again.

OK, so if we start exporting "stuff" from the Earth to a position outside the Solar system, what happens to the Earth's orbit round the Sun?

Best wishes,

Martin

It doesn't have to be outside the solar system. As long as it is from outside the earth. If we bump into a NEO (near Earth Object) like an asteroid then it would likely come from the asteroid belt between mars and jupiter. Possibly the remains of a planet there that took a bump from something really really big. If it is a comet then it likely would come from the Kuiper belt, a group of some 200 planetoids and comets of which pluto is a member. Both of which are part of the solar system. The term "outside of the system" is a thermodynamic term and doesn't always mean just what it sounds like it should.

Conservation of momentum says it the earth gets lighter then it has to move faster to keep the momentum the same. If the earth gets heavier then it moves slower. But since the mass of Earth = 5.9742 × 10^24 kilograms, your talking a lot of stuff to make even the smallest noticible change.

[sdantonio]

http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/nmp/long_mvt_nmp_e.php

Magnetic north movement

[martinw]

Dear Steven , Geof, and all,

"Stand on the shoulders of giants"???? It wouldn't make blind bit of intellectual elevation for this dumb pigmy.

Anyway, thanks for trying.

Having to cancel a lucrative second career as a climate change expert is a bit of a b#gger.

Best wishes,


Martin

[Geof]

Dear Steven , Geof, and all,

"Stand on the shoulders of giants"???? It wouldn't make blind bit of intellectual elevation for this dumb pigmy.

Anyway, thanks for trying.

Having to cancel a lucrative second career as a climate change expert is a bit of a b#gger.

Best wishes,


Martin

The "Stand on the Shoulders of Giants: is a reference to Kepler and others. I think it is attributed to Newton; that he sadi he has seen further than others because he stood on the shoulders of giants; Kepler was one of the 'Giants'.

Your 'pigmy' is almost apropo; the phrase has been traced further back than Newton and its original form referred to a dwarf standing on a giant's shoulder.

See the sort of stuff you missed by not being a physicist .

[martinw]

.

See the sort of stuff you missed by not being a physicist .

Dear Geof,

I'm shamefully shrinking even further into matter that has almost negative mass .

Any chance of Orbit Re-Alignment?

Best wishes


Martin

[sdantonio]

"Stand on the shoulders of giants"

Just means to me that when I fall off (not if, but when) I will probably break more things then if I were standing on the shoulders of short people