X-Message-Number: 26199
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 05:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Doug Skrecky <>
Subject: permafrost burial clarification

> Message #26193 From: Thomas Donaldson <>
> and the ground warms up. Whether or not that happens, there are
> lots of microbes which will happily eat the stored remains,
> chemically protected or not.
>
  At the risk of sounding pendantic, permafrost burial without
mummification is indeed a complete waste of time. Said mummification
requires storage in a corrosion proof air tight metal barrier coffin,
which includes ample dessicant inside the coffin to insure that no
moisture is ever available to raise the glass transition temperature of
the stored tissue. Microbes are completely inactive in a dry condition.
  A titanium or stainless steel armoured coffin encased in concrete might
leave little to chance, but would also be rather more expensive than
CI's liquid nitrogen storage. The only advantage would be in the event it
takes thousands of years to develop the (nano)technology to resuscitate
"patients", since cryonics suspension would almost certainly
fail during such a long period of storage.
  I gather that no serious attempt has been made at permafrost burial as
an alternative to cryonics, since (nano)technology skeptics are unlikely
to consider cryonics in the first place. One hears estimates of of 50
years for cryonic storage. Perhaps some fear 500 years may be required.
However 5,000 years of cryonic storage does not seem to have been
considered, since reliable cryonic storage for this length of time is
implausible.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26199