Breathe Under Water Without Oxygen Tanks 473
Charlie Paglee writes "An Israeli inventor has developed a way for divers to breathe underwater without cumbersome oxygen tanks. His apparatus makes use of the air that is dissolved in water like the gills of a fish. With patents in Europe and the USA how long will it take for someone to use this to swim the English Channel underwater?"
Not SCUBA (Score:5, Informative)
I have scuba dived since 1982 and I am rarely limited by the amount of O2 I have handy. The limiting factor for any diving to any real depth (>30 feet say) is the amount of residual nitrogen in your blood stream. If that gets too high, and you surface, you get what is commonly referred to as the 'bends'; little bubbles of nitrogen bubbling out of your blood stream. Bad news. This is true for recreational diving anyway. The military, deep sea welders and others with decompression chambers might not have this problem.
The other big drawback I see is that at depth the pressure of the water on your body is very great. That is why modern scuba uses pressure delivery systems. That is, they deliver air at a pressure that is near to the surrounding pressure. This makes it so you can actually draw in a breath of air given all the pressure on your chest (and hence the 3000 psi scuba tanks). I don't see how the contraption can both be small and deliver at a high pressure while operating off of one battery. Even at ~32 feet you are at 1 atmosphere extra pressure.
Now, it may very well be great for submarines, but I don't think it will be useful for scuba.
Also, now that I think about it, I think the US navy has some pure O2 underwater low depth breathing rigs like this. The big advantage of those is that they produce no bubbles. Very stealthy.
Pure O2 is poisonous below about 32feet, if I remember correctly and if you go below about 100feet, just depending you can get high. Go google, "rapture of the deep."
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:5, Informative)
The Navy rigs you're talking about are a form of rebreather. They take the air you breath out, remove some CO2, add O2, and give it back to you like that. You're limited in these cases by the amount of O2 you carry as well as the amount of CO2 the scrubbers in the apparatus can uptake. I think these also have trouble delivering at any significant pressure, thus the low-depth limitations.
Rebreathers... (Score:5, Insightful)
Rebreathers have essentially three parts.
1) The gas store/s. This is the bottles of gas used to top up the system as the oxygen levels become depleted. This gas can be air, pure oxygen, nitrox (basically air with a larger percentage of oxygen added to it), trimix (a specialised mixture of nitrogen, oxygen and helium) or heliox (oxygen/heium mixture).
2) The scrubber. This canister is scrubs out any carbon dioxide exhaled by the diver.
2) The airbag (sometime refered to as a lung). This stores the air being scrubbed in a bag at ambient pressure, which is all that is required to be able to physically breathe. As the diver descends, the air in the airbag compresses and gets topped up from the gas bottles. As the dive surfaces, the air expands and an over inflation valve releases the excess gas.
As always it is way more complicated than what I described, depending on whether you are talking closed circuit or semi-closed circuit kit - but that is the basics.
Oh yeah,
I think these also have trouble delivering at any significant pressure, thus the low-depth limitations.
Not quite - as I mentioned the gas in the air bladder is at ambient - what limits depth with semi-closed circuit rebreathers (which are far more prevalent) is that the oxygen content is usually much higher than normal air. Oxygen becomes significantly toxic at a partial pressure of 1.6 ATM, which occurs at ~ 66m (220ft) breathing air or just 6m (20ft) with pure oxygen.
Re:Rebreathers... (Score:3, Informative)
Other mixes use varying levels of inert gases. according to one text i read not too long ago, the most effective to use, interestingly, was argon; i would have expected it to be either helium, as the lightest, or to increase in effectiveness with atomic weight.
good point about
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:4, Informative)
Pure O2 at 2 ata (aka, 33 feet under sea water) is deadly. You will enjoy convulsions until you drown. This is why when we are using special breathing gases (such as Nitrox, which has a higher percentage of oxygen), we keep the ppO2 under 1.6, which limits our maximum operating depth (MOD).
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:3, Informative)
Humans can live normally for seven days with elevated oxygen levels at about half ata, although the level of hyperoxia that can be tolerated indefinitely with no pulmonary effects cannot be identified with certainty. However, exposure for 24 hours at 0.75 ata causes pulmonary symptoms in
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:5, Insightful)
If you had essentially unlimited O2, then you could stay deeper for longer, and do proper decompression on the way up.
As for the pressure, the air is dissolved in the water, and hence is *already* at the same pressure as the water itself. No additional pressurization necessary.
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:5, Interesting)
It's safer if you maintain a dive profile that always allows you to return straight to the surface.
So the fact that this device could allow you to maintain at 30 or 60 feet for the 30+ minutes it might take to safely decompress on the way up isn't likely to change the rules for recreational diving.
Now it may be a big advantage for commercial or military diving where the divers are professionals and are willing and able to do dives that require mandatory decompression stops..
Disagree, think it could find a hold in rec diving (Score:5, Interesting)
While that is true I still think it will find purchase in recreational diving.
The concern about casual divers running out of air is a big part of choosing a no-decomp dive for everyone, and for semi-advanced groups you could arrange a nice dive that went deeper for a while, then shallower for a while, until they could go back up.
Another major benefit is no more problems with heavy breathers which can terminate a dive early and really throw off plans of a dive group, which is another reason I think it will be quickly adopted even if it's not used for longer dives. It finally lets people dive as long as they are supposed to without tank capacity being a limit.
And yes, on some of my first dives I was one of those people that chewed through air way too quickly. It came from trying to also do underwater photography right off the bat before I was comfortable with boyancy and as a result I used a lot of energy (and thus air) maintaining depth. I don't make that mistake anymore!
Re:Disagree, think it could find a hold in rec div (Score:3, Interesting)
Newbies can get in a bind pretty easily too. I had a regulator malfunction at about 80 feet diving a wreck. It spewed air, which wasn't so bad for breathing (I've had them ice, which is muc
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, some people have a problem with PADI's philosophy and style of teaching(I sure do), but I think their stance on no deco rec diving
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps, but even with this device you would not have "essentially unlimited O2". The device requires a battery to operate, and when the battery runs out of juice, you stop getting air.
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:2)
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:4, Informative)
The other big drawback I see is that at depth the pressure of the water on your body is very great. That is why modern scuba uses pressure delivery systems. That is, they deliver air at a pressure that is near to the surrounding pressure. This makes it so you can actually draw in a breath of air given all the pressure on your chest (and hence the 3000 psi scuba tanks). I don't see how the contraption can both be small and deliver at a high pressure while operating off of one battery. Even at ~32 feet you are at 1 atmosphere extra pressure."
I am noi scuba diver, but I know a bit of physics: whatever method is used to extract the gases from the water at that depth, these gases WILL be at the pressure of the water at that depth. No need to pressurize it.
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:4, Interesting)
Because you're already at that pressure, any device will produce O2 at that pressure. It would actually be *harder* to get it atmospheric pressure.
Also, now that I think about it, I think the US navy has some pure O2 underwater low depth breathing rigs like this.
I don't think anyone uses pure O2. When going past a certain dept, I think it's mainly a O2 + Helium mix, hence divers sounding like Donard Duck.
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:5, Funny)
Only the asian ones.
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:2)
Your just going to have to go back and get a cert for decompression diving, and learn to hang out decompressing
The other big drawback I see is that at depth the pressure of the water on your body is very great. That is why modern scuba uses pressure delivery systems.
I imagine that the air from this device will be generated near the pressure of the surrounding water, there
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:2)
Decompression works up until a point. Yeah, you can decompress slowly using a tank if you have only been down for a while. The effects are cumulative over short periods, however. If you spend three hours down at 100 feet then it is going to take you a long time to decompress on the way- probably a lot more than you want spend just hanging out in the water staring at nothing on the way up.
-sirk
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:2)
Well, actually, I googled "raptures of the deep," and the summary on the fifth hit is: Beyond this depth a condition known as nitrogen narcosis (popularly called "raptures of the deep"). Thus replacing the nitrogen with helium for deep dives. (the bends, BTW, is caused by all gasses coming out of solution, not just nitrogen). Pressure would be something of an issue for this rig, as it appears to work by reducing pressure to extract the oxygen. Presumably they've thought of
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:2)
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:2)
As to the pressure deal, your pressure is the same as the surrounding pressure. So when you are using this tank, it is delivering it at the same pressure. IOW, if you are 2 atom, then you also have 2 atom inside you as does the device. So everthing is equal and all is happy. But I do wonder what would happen if you shot downwards quickly. Strikes m
I am also a long time diver... (Score:5, Informative)
I have scuba dived since 1982 and I am rarely limited by the amount of O2 I have handy.
Because I like decompression diving, air supply is still the number one limiting factor to my dives. I still don't think this will be useful.
That is why modern scuba uses pressure delivery systems... I don't see how the contraption can both be small and deliver at a high pressure while operating off of one battery. Even at ~32 feet you are at 1 atmosphere extra pressure.
I call bullshit! First, pressure delivery systems are a direct consequence of storing air under pressure na d the reason why that is done is the convenience of have all that air in an itsy bitsy bottle! Second, the contraption will automatically create air at ambient pressure (which is all you need to be able to breathe). Third, at 10m (~33 ft) you are at 2ATM pressure, not 1ATM!
The main reason this is useless is due to the following calculation... At the surface, 1 ATM, to fill one one shallow breath (~3 litres) you would need to process 5 / 0.015 = 200 litres of seawater. Take that down to 20m (66ft - 3 ATM) and that becomes 600 litres, because the gas compresses under the pressure of the water. Now consider that a relatively fit adult might have as many as 15 of these breaths a minute! - 9000 litres a minute of seawater!Do a relatively technical dive down to 50m (6ATM) and I reckon the guy using that kit would be picking his buddy out of the water inlet!
Additionally,
Pure O2 is poisonous below about 32feet, if I remember correctly and if you go below about 100feet, just depending you can get high. Go google, "rapture of the deep."
1) This system extracts AIR, not oxygen. 2) Oxygen has little to do with nitrogen narcosis, aka "rapture of the deep".
Re:I am also a long time diver... (Score:4, Insightful)
Units of pressure (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I am also a long time diver... (Score:3, Interesting)
Secondly, by creating the gas under varying pressure, you are dealing with a complex concept:
- The mechanism creating the gas must work with (an almost static) pressurized fluid - water as input.
- After sealing and then while spinning, the gas inhabits the area nearest the axis, and floats up to the top of the chamber. The water is in a vortex. The atti
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:3, Interesting)
-sirket
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:3, Informative)
1) The deeper you go, the faster you use up your air. SCUBA tanks have their size given by the volume of air at one atmosphere they contain--a standard tank these days is a single 80 cu. ft. (units courtesy of the U.S. lead in dive equipment.) You breathe about 1 cu. ft/minute at one atmosphere. At 2 atmospheres (32 ft/10 m) it's twice that, and so on. With a single 80 it's a race between the no-decompression time and the air available, particularly since you've got to have enoug
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:3, Informative)
At 100 feet underwater, the pressure is 44 pounds per square inch more than at the surface (that's in seawater; 43 in fresh water). The reason for the 3000-psi tank is to get a useful amount of air into a reasonably small space; the regulator on your tank drops the pressure by 2956 psi before the air ever gets to your mouthpiece.
rj
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:2)
You seem to be suggesting that the ambient pressure is going to push the air from the tank into your lungs, which is just wrong. That pressure is going to keep the air in the tank unless it's released at higher than ambient. So it needs a high pressure to leave the tank, then the second stage (the regulator in your mouth) drops it from that 140 to ju
Re:Not SCUBA (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh dear - I guess my BSAC advanced nitrox qualification (50% stage mix) was just a dream then. They also do an extended range course that gives 80% stage mix. Others do 100% stage mix (dunno why - risky, little extra benefit, and considerably more expensive) Just because PADI don't do it...
But other than that spot on.
heh (Score:5, Funny)
Great technology! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great technology! (Score:2)
Re:Great technology! (Score:2)
Re:Great technology! (Score:3, Insightful)
In the open ocean, they talk about
Great! (Score:3, Interesting)
Does that make it lighter or heavier than existing oxygen tanks?
Sounds to me like a job for nuclear-powered batteries.
Re:Great! (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, weight isn't an issue --- humans float, even with heavy steel tanks strapped to them, and you need lead weights to make yourself neutrally bouyant. You can get plastic air tanks, but nobody wants them: steel is more reliable and cheaper, and having lighter tanks means you have to wear more weights. Which are uncomfortable.
Oh, and divers very rarely breathe oxygen. (Unless you're counting the weird mixtures you use for very deep diving.) It's strictly compressed air, and is usually very dry compressed air to prevent rust in the tanks --- diving is one of the few activities where you can be under ten metres of water and still have a dry throat.
Re:Great! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great! (Score:3, Interesting)
Humans will not float with steel tanks attached without some method of buoyancy compensation. Aluminum tanks are ~3 pounds negative when full and are ~3 pounds positive when empty (77.4 ft^3 [the amount of gas in an Al80 at 3000psi] weighs
Re:Great! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Great! (Score:2)
Re:Great! (Score:3, Informative)
Extending bottom time with
Good News... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Good News... (Score:4, Funny)
Amy: Yes. STOP asking!
Oh yeah that's safe (Score:3, Funny)
About 10 minutes, just enough time for the keel of one of the kajillion freighters that go up and down the channel to hit the guy's head...
Re:Oh yeah that's safe (Score:3, Funny)
Uh, the keel would be the least of your worries.. your real cause for concern would be the big food-processors to the stern.
Sounds good and all, but... (Score:2, Funny)
Backup oxygen? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Backup oxygen? (Score:2)
Re:Backup oxygen? (Score:3, Interesting)
With recreational diving, also called no-decompression diving, the idea is that you can immediately return to the surface at any point. Usually, we take a 3-5minute decompression stop at 15', just as a precaution.
To get certified (with PADI anyways) one of the things you have to do is a controlled emergency ascent (which
TUBA? (Score:5, Funny)
I think that TUBA is already taken.
Oxygen tanks (Score:2)
Does anyone dive with just a pure oxygen tank? Or is this writeup totally whacked?
As others have pointed out, this won't really let anyone stay underwater longer. Most experienced divers don't run out of air while diving. They surface when their dive computers tell them to surface based on the amount of nitrogen in their bloodstream. This device does nothing to address that issue.
I cert
Re:Oxygen tanks (Score:2)
From TFA (Score:2)
The article I read said the first issue is running out of air:
Well, actually the limiting factor is the amount of nitrogen in your bloodstream.
Re:Oxygen tanks (Score:2)
And I suspect that many of those who have don't have to worry about doing it a second time.
Re:Oxygen tanks (Score:2)
Re:Oxygen tanks (Score:2)
Oxygen becomes toxic at pressure. You would likely blackout at about 20' on 100% oxygen, and as such 100% oxygen is NOT recommended for diving.
Even on nitrox, the deepest you can go on EAN32 (32% oxygen) is about 110', and I think around 90' on EAN36.
Re:Oxygen tanks (Score:2)
In a nutshell, the buildup of too much oxygen can casue temporary neurological issues that can lead to convulsions (consider it like your computer locking up and automatically rebooting its
Re:Oxygen tanks (Score:2)
Plain old air is basically just a blend of nitrogen and oxygen. Nitrox is "Enriched Air" with a higher O2 content created by mixing 100% O2 with air. Becuase O2 becomes toxic at relatively shallow depths, you can dive deeper on air than nitrox, and deeper still by replacing some of the nitrogen with helium. Higher concentrations of o2 are used for shallow decompression.
Amazing that someone didn't think of this before (Score:4, Interesting)
Usually inventions only come about when the underlying technology is improved to the point where the new invention is feasible (i.e. made possible by faster processors, stronger steel, etc).
A look at the article reveals that the main components in this invention are a centrifuge to adjust pressure, and a battery to power said centrifuge. Both of these components have been around in usable form for decades at least.
Re:Amazing that someone didn't think of this befor (Score:2)
And how, pray tell, does one go about decreasing pressure with a centrifuge?
-theGreater.Re:Amazing that someone didn't think of this befor (Score:2)
Re:Amazing that someone didn't think of this befor (Score:2)
A look at the article reveals that the main components in this invention are a centrifuge to adjust pressure, and a battery to power said centrifuge. Both of these components have been around in usable form for decades at least.
Well, sometimes if there is a good enough alternative nobody bothers to try other things. C
Oxygen tanks?? (Score:2, Interesting)
SCUBA divers used compressed NORMAL air in the tanks. You can dive safely down to 50 metres on that (this is nothing to do with 'the narks yet').
Profession divers, usually military types (Royal navy etc.) use compressed air to deeper depths (70 metres).
The problem comes when the ratio of oxygen is greater than normal) - you can die of oxygen poisoning - hence why saturation divers have to breathe a reduced mixture of oxygen with nitrogen.
So, this is great for the pure rebreathers,
Old hat (Score:5, Informative)
Now the problem was the rate of diffusion, how much gas will the membrane allows to pass within a given time. The demo GE put on was fine and dandy since the bird's O2 demands were so low. But with a living, breathing, working mammal, thats a whole different kettle of fish.
I hope that the Israeli understands that before he scales up, or he might wind up agianst a dead end with the project.
Full battery charge (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm going to be a little hesitant with batteries. It's enough trouble tracking rechargable AA and laptop batteries. Now you'll need a reserve battery (for your reserve air) and it better darn well be healthy! A pressure sensor is a lot simpler than something that calculates remaining charge.
Still, I have no doubt they'll figure out how to make it robust enough for us casual divers in the next 10-20 years. 'Til then I'm going to stick with the malfunctions I know how to survive.
Popular Machanics in the 60's... (Score:2)
Who is going to use this? (Score:4, Insightful)
how long will it take for someone to use this to.. (Score:3, Informative)
Probably never.
Swimming underwater will take a great deal more effort since more body frontal area is exposed to water, which is denser than air. You will also have to expend more energy to either a) stay submerged, since you would be fighting your positive buoyancy or b) dragging along more weight to stay neutral buoyant.
I hope the corporate IP lawyers take note (Score:5, Insightful)
This is an invention. It is innovative, it solves a real problem, provides real value, and prior to this, did not exist. This is the kind of work that deserves patent protection. When I compare this to say, the genius behind Amazon's "one-click" patent, I find it quite humorous. There's NO COMPARISON.
Re:I hope the corporate IP lawyers take note (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you sure? I wonder if on DiverDot, there aren't hoards of diving professionals complaining about how obvious this device is and how screwed up the patent system is for allowing the patent.
More likely... (Score:2)
La Cosa Nostra (Score:2)
Re:La Cosa Nostra (Score:3, Funny)
Have a nice day.
Biology class lied! (Score:4, Insightful)
In biology class I was taught fish breathed by filtering the oxygen molecules from the water passing over their gills, absorbing the oxygen into their bloodstream.
Someone needs to tell all the biology teachers that isn't how fish breathe. Apparently they breathe by using a small centrifuge which lowers the pressure of the seawater thereby releasing the oxygen into their bloodstream. Let's not forget the internal batteries they use to power these centrifuges as well.
Seriously, this is a fascinating idea. Though as a previous poster said, I am not sure how safe it is to breathe pure O2, usually dive tanks contain compressed air, not compressed O2. Also it has little military applications as it could not be used for deep diving due to limitations of mixing the O2 with nitrogen or even helium for deep dives. This puts using it as an emergency escape method for a sub right out, unless they are above a few hundred feet. Though this really could save a ton of lives used on ships to aid in escaping lower decks, or even fighting to regain flooded compartments, or minor repairs.
Should this technology materialize I see the biggest application in the tourism industry. Think the Great Barrier Reef, or Hawaii, or the Cayman Islands. I think this would most likely replace snorkelling as a recreation at a tourist location.
Re:Biology class lied! (Score:2)
Should this technology materialize I see the biggest application in the tourism industry. Think the Great Barrier Reef, or Hawaii, or the Cayman Islands. I think this would most likely replace snorkelling as a recreation at a tourist location.
I'd still think even this device might be a little too dangerous for neophyte tourists to use in place of snorkling. How deep is the great barrier reef, etc? Wouldn't there be concerns with inexperienced divers getting the bends when they used this thing for half
Re:Biology class lied! (Score:2)
It's as though a million hippies and backpackers who wanted to survive as scuba instrutors cried out then were suddenly silenced.
Not good enough! (Score:2)
That plus an electrified boomerang, and I am confident that I too can gain a topless mermaid girlfriend!
Ah, the questions... (Score:5, Interesting)
Looks like your really trading an oxygen limit for a battery limit.
A centrifuge. Ah, wonder what the trade off is between swimming with a heavy tank and swimming with a spinning mass are like. Hope the moment of inertia isn't too big.
Wonder what other gasses you'll be collecting from the ocean along with your oxygen. Might not want to use this baby around any volcanic vents and such.
Re:Ah, the questions... (Score:3, Interesting)
The diagram shows the diver with a pony bottle around his neck. It would be better to have one of those AND a reserve in the system itself, to compensate. I guess then you're talking more like rebreather size, though... not that little can.
Looks like your really trading an oxygen limit for a battery limit.
Yeah. I expect there is potential for battery tech to get better though. On the
Re:Ah, the questions... (Score:4, Interesting)
We used to detect these while diving because you "bounce" off of the superdense water if you're neutrally bouyant, and you can see the optical distortions caused by the density difference.
These little sinks can be fun to explore, since they often have extremely well-preserved stuff in them. However, they tend to be not only anoxic, but saturated with hydrogen sulfide (which is pretty toxic) and very alkaline (which eats up things like rubber seals, exposed skin etc). Wearing this device into such an environment would be fatal.
Re:Ah, the questions... (Score:3, Funny)
If you're swimming in the superheated water surrounding a volcanic vent on the ocean floor, I'd say you have more pertinent concerns than the extra sulfur your rebreather might be picking up.
Jeremy
Re:Ah, the questions... (Score:4, Funny)
Not so! You just need a really long extension cord and an AC adapter....
How did I know ... (Score:2)
Patents (Score:3, Funny)
With patents in Europe and the USA how long will it take for someone to use this to swim the English Channel underwater?"
I don't know. Probably about the same length of time it would take without the patents.
What about toxic gases? (Score:2)
I think I'll continue with my tried and true scuba tank where I know the air is good (unless they leave that window to the parking lot open, again!).
...because it's there... (Score:2)
I must be missing something. Does Guinness's Book have an all-purpose English Channel section? Why else would someone do this, when there's ordinary air available nearly the whole way . . .
Cooler Technology Out There (Score:2)
Truly Vaporware (Score:3, Insightful)
This is just someone looking for some venture funding. My guess is that you would have to pass a lot of water through the thing to get enough oxygen out, and between that and the batteries, you'd be much worse off than with bottles.
One of those james bond devices that pulled you along and sucked the o2 out of the water as it went through he device could work, but that is nothing like the design mentioned, and would have to contain a bigger backup tank because one cold spot and your oxygen is gone.
It could supplement subs, but if you have a sub with that much power, you might as well just blast the o2 from the hydrogen with electricity and use that, much more reliable.
For all those worried about oxygen toxicity: (Score:5, Interesting)
The process of lowering the pressure around the seawater will lead to the release of all disolved gasses, not just oxygen. I didn't notice anything about a co2 scrubber, so I think its safe to say that the inhaled gasses will be similar in content to whatever is disolved in the ocean.
At atmospheric level, air is: ~73% nitrogen, ~23% oxygen, ~2% carbon dioxide, ~2% other, if I recall correctly, and I don't think that the solubility constants are signifigantly different in salt water to throw off those percentages that much. If anything its probably less rich in oxygen and more carbon dioxide enriched at greater depths due to marine life respiration.
With a system like this, it might even be possible to remove some of the nitrogen from the breathing mix with a second step. This would allow unlimited dive times without the nitrogen buildup that results in the bends if you stay down too long.
Should This Get A Patent? (Score:4, Insightful)
But having listened to the amount for rubbish software patents and the arguments against them, I found myself thinking, on first reading the article, that he shouldn't get a patent, because it will be abused. He'll monopolise, it's not really innovative(fish do ity), he'll over price the technology, stifle innovation, etc, etc....
Wow. Software patents have really twisted my view of the whole patent system.
Think Simpler (Score:4, Insightful)
If it was stable enough, it could even be useful for life preservers.
No kidding (Score:4, Informative)
I'm also a longtime diver, and the article struck me as silly.
As you note, nitrogen saturation is our primary limitation at depth. There's Nitrox and Trimix, but exotic gasses are only so useful. This proposed breathing system seems to be proposing a high-oxygen mixture. Oxygen becomes toxic at high doeses. Fabulous.
My favorite part, though, is the claim that tanks become "unbalanced" as they empty. I've never noticed this effect.
Re:No kidding (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Take your last breath and not die! (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds fun. Send me a postcard.
Re:Take your last breath and not die! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:One kilo what? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:One kilo what? (Score:2)
Re:A step in the right direction (Score:2)
Which is a problem 'cause you can't hear the front door open...
Ah, to be 18 again.
This underwater breathing thing would have come in handy at that point: I could have hid in the pond....
m-