thephysicist
323399
10301
155
Wow Such Technology
I saw a popular and highly upvoted gallery on imgur, and it bothered me.
It was about this: http://www.yankodesign.com/2014/01/03/scuba-breath/
Dubbed as a "great" advancement in technology, it claims, like the imgur gallery did, to allow humans to breathe underwater without an air tank.
People lie on the internet all the time, but the only thing that really bothers me is popular pseudoscience. This is pseudoscience.
As a physicist and certified diver who enjoys talking about science to the masses, I thought I would take some time to debunk this using concepts everybody can understand.
This is the ocean. The ocean has oxygen. I accessed the World Ocean Atlas's dissolved oxygen data to find out how much. About 0.21 mol O₂/m³. This is the oxygen we need to filter out.
This is a human*. (* actually, this is an Olympian. They are basically super humans.) Humans need air. Every time an adult one takes a breath, it breathes approximately 500 mL of air.
However, we don't have air. All we brought was this. Somebody thought that was a good idea. All of our air needs to come from this. Now, the deeper we go underwater, the higher the pressure is, and the more air we need to breathe in the same volume. Let's assume we're diving 10 meters (~32.8 feet) underwater. And no deeper, because things are only going to get worse from here.
This is the backup equipment you should bring if you want to try this device.
After doing some physics stuff, I found that for EVERY breath you take 10 meters underwater at 25 °C, we would need to filter the oxygen from 190.3 Liters of water (50.3 US Gallons) at 100% efficiency to take a breath. Now, one should note that you need significantly less oxygen than this per breath, but you still need to intake 500 mL of gas to avoid gasping for air.
A quick calculation determines that at slow, controlled breathing rates (12 breaths per minute), the device would need to filter 38 liters of water per second (10 US gallons per second) to meet our required air supply.
I hope you can appreciate just how much (and how fast) water (and everything swimming in it) would have to flow through your face for EVERY breath you take to be able to use this device when it operates at 100% efficiency.
Now, I would be a bad scientist if I didn't try as hard as I damned could to make this thing reasonable. So, I introduce the rebreather.
Rebreathers are devices that abuse the fact that one only uses a fraction of the oxygen breathed in per breath. Instead of exhaling your breath into the water, rebreathers absorb the exhaled carbon dioxide and store the remaining oxygen in a tank to be reused.
While rebreathers can significantly reduce the amount of oxygen our device would need to take in, after more math, I still found the rate at which the device would need to filter water to be wholly unrealistic.
This is not a thing, and will not be a thing. Perhaps even MORE damning to the concept than the reasons I have mentioned is the medical toxicity issues associated with breathing pure oxygen (these issues get exacerbated under water pressure!) However, I focused this exposé on the physical reasons this device is gloriously inconvenient. I encourage readers interested in the medical aspect to look up a study on breathing 100% oxygen.
I hope, if anything, you learned something. Don't take my word for it, learn the physics!
I created an account just to point out how ridiculous this is, and I will now always downvote pseudoscience.
If people enjoy it, I might debunk some other crap I see.
Misc. FAQ - wordy : https://ghostbin.com/paste/8y8t7
I don't own any cats or see any ass, so here's a picture of my lab. The thing in the top right is a muon (of cosmic ray origin) detector.
The big thing is called the El-Vacatron. It's named after a local Mexican restaurant. It makes radiation.
Sitting on the El Vacatron to the left is a hot air rework station. (For reworking solder joints or shrinking heat shrink) Somebody was using it and was lazy, so they set it on the El Vacatron. It wasn't me. OK, it was me.
Don't worry, that's a duck taped lead block in the bottom right over the hinge. It's safe.
MoDubs
As a scientific diver this thing was killing me (HELLO oxtox seizures!). Thank you for proving how crazy it is.
chainletter
I always upvote the Bullshit Police.
CillianTheWriter
I knew this was unrealistic, I just couldn't figure out the science. Thanks, debunker guy! (ps please do more stuff kthx)
Chotchkies2072
Not only well researched and written, but done in 9 slides with descriptions. Not 11, causing an extra load. This person knows his audience!
ilovealots
Why hello there fellow scientist. I'm glad you have the energy to debunk these things. Swim against the stream little salmon!
FunKeyBayBee
freethenerd
Also team rocket did it first!
SeaFan
I thought the same thing when I first saw it. Thanks for doing some of the math.
ThatGuyFromNantucketYouveAllHeardAbout
It took me about 4 sec to realize that the amount of water it would need to move would be astronomical. Thus making it unrealistic.
3nd3rwiggin
Fellow SCUBA diver says Thank You.
vergil25
Sio how is a fish or shark able to do this in the ocean mister/miss?
CutMyLifeIntoPiecesThisIsMyLastResort
FYI the Olympian is Dario Colognia a Swiss cross-country skier. He won Skiathlon (30 km) at the Olympic Games of Sochi in 2014.
DaveTheMurderingHippo
But... but... I wanted to swim like the Jedi in Episode 1...
eggmuffin
Then a pair of very small tanks of pressurized air will do the job just fine. It won't last long, though.
ThatCK
Like Bond had
AcadiaEinstein
*Looks at e-Trade account* Where the hell were you a week ago?
JesusWalkedOnWaterToDrownInWine
Thienthe.
jezebeldandy
but....Gillyweed...
mslangerhanspresents
Don't worry, Gillyweed is still scientifically sound. This was a Gillyweed imposter
EmKellesvig
I kind of love you right now. *slow grin*
ObviousCaptain
But can he see why kids love the taste of cinnamon toast crunch?
DoobiusMaximus
Thanks for the informative post, but never say never. It may not be possible today, but could be in the future.
eggmuffin
No, nothing this small. Didn't you follow the math? Filtering 38 liters of water per second simply isn't practical.
[deleted]
[deleted]
tyconle
Because modern technology inhibits it. If someone designs a battery and motor that is small enough and powerful enough to filter water (1/2)
tyconle
Quick enough and then something that converts it into breathable oxygen, then it can happen. Technology needs to advance in order to happen.
Darx94
If anybody is interested in the medical aspect of this, I'll attempt to explain. Breathing doesn't function solely for bringing oxygen 1/2
thatssowhitty
to make sure I dont have it wrong, but dont high CO2 levels correspond to an acidosic state? Hyper ventilation leads to resp alkalosis?
Darx94
to your cells, though that's a big part of it. It also helps to balance your blood pH. Oxygen levels, along with CO2 levels, help to keep2/?
Darx94
Read from bottom to top after the first comment. Probably should have thought this through more.
Darx94
your blood from becoming too acidic. So yeah, breathing in pure oxygen would fuck us up pretty bad. Hope this helped, for whoever reads this
Darx94
delicate balance, with your blood needing to be between 7.35 and 7.45 pH. Now, our bodies have adapted to having a certain amount of Oxygen4
Darx94
they give you a paper bag. You're taking in too much oxygen while getting rid of your CO2. The paper bag helps to trap the CO2, and keep 7/?
Darx94
Becoming very acidic. This would destroy cell tissue, and cause brain damage very quickly. That's why when you hyperventilate 6/?
Darx94
in every breath, since air is always mixed with other elements. If we tried to take in pure oxygen, our blood pH would decrease greatly. 5/?
Darx94
your blood from becoming too acidic (in the presence of too much oxygen) or too basic (in the presence of too much CO2). It's a very 3/?
squip
As another scientist, we must be careful to declare something "impossible", especially using current technology and capability to do so.
wizardboy24
I agree. This is what I was hoping someone would say. It may not be feasible with our current tech, but that's what advances are for.
Schweed
True, but there's a loooong way to go from concept art to engineering.
squip
No question. I'm just saying we can scarcely say it's "impossible". That's an absolute, and one we humans frequently end up being wrong on.
Schweed
That's what's so awesome about science!
chansuke
You cant get around how much water needs to be filtered. Unless this device can magically make oxygen.
squip
No, but theoretically you might can accommodate it someday in some way.
chansuke
But you would still have to flow that much water. And its a pretty substantial amount
squip
Again, yes it's a challenge. It's a lot of water. But we cannot know what future scientific advancement will bring, or what it won't.
chansuke
The amount of water needed is a constant. You CANNOT get around it.
ukatox
http://imgur.com/O1sCuWo +1 for busting the myth.
Verelse
I supposed light sabers aren't real either? Dammit!
BluHaze
OP probably hates Mythbusters too since they're more of a source of entertainment than actual science.
ukatox
blowing stuff up is science!
BluHaze
Haha, I agree! I've heard a lot of scientists get uppity about it though because they sacrifice tedious repetition for entertainment.
DARfuckinROCKS
+1 for science.
[deleted]
[deleted]
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
I would definitely participate
QuaaaidStartTheReactor
http://imgur.com/aGS9l7m
bestestfester
science bitch
babelincoln27
Incorrect!!! just yeah science
MyLifeisaComplicatedDrinkingGame
As an engineer and not doctor, are we sure we need to inhale 500mL of gas if it's 100% oxygen? Our atmosphere is only 25% Oxygen per breath
ListenHereYouLittleShit
As a biologist (and a whole bunch of other credentials): YES! ~500mL is very standard for avg human beings. (superhumans above excluded).
InternalOrganPlayer
No we don't need 500mL for adequate oxygen...but we need 500mL of ventilation to remove the carbon dioxide!
MyLifeisaComplicatedDrinkingGame
Touche!
DARfuckinROCKS
I think what he meant was our lungs need to breathe in 500 mL of air in order to avoid that suffocation feeling.
usulidircotiido
+1 for science and for not posting a stupid cat picture at the end.
theincrediblemachine
I'd rather have a pet at the end than these type of comments. this whole 'yay for science' thing really has to stop.
usulidircotiido
"+1", not "yay".
ImFrank
I'll take dogs over cats any day. +1 for lab pic.
fnurglbhurg
Maybe... A science lab?
PuppiesoverKittensAnyday
lol
ImFrank
Username relevancy level: Over 9000
PuppiesoverKittensAnyday
haha pretty much
thefar
Thank you for educating people! I was sad when people actually believed this. But your scientific explanation makes it hilarious.
Rayxor
What's really sad is people will buy this instead of taking the time to go pick some gillyweed.
prfesser
Ha! I *TRUMP* your factual scientific explanation! I want this device and saw it on a movie, so it's REAL! Nyah-nyah-nyah!
SteevyT
Funny thing, when Thunderball came out, the military asked how long the device worked. Answer: "As long as you hold your breath."
thefar
Nyah!
droomph
and this is how most discussions go on the internet.
dwright1
I feel like you're too smart for imgur...and me.
chemistrydoc
People who are smart bring a lot to Imgur. Trust me on this.
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
I trust. I've seen a lot of your comments & upvote them often. When I saw this post I actually thought "here's another like chemistrydoc."
[deleted]
[deleted]
chemistrydoc
They are the worst kind aren't they
dwright1
Your rep and brain intimidate me. I'll sit over here quietly with my double digit IQ.
beffeer
I feel like I was struggling to breathe throughout this post
bolshevik09
Nice
shivercorn
So Star wars won't come true? *cries* *remembers Jar Jar Binks* *smiles*
synergist
*remembers James Bond* *gets a little misty-eyed again*
woozle
Good. because he's an annoying asshole.
bitemygloriousgoldenass
sadly yes, but sci-fi can become reality if you don't give up and keep pushing to make the impossible possible. go to school kids.
binkybow
I once told a guy Jar Jar Binks was my favourite character (with a serious face but I was joking) and the look on his face was priceless
binkybow
Like, you could see ALL affection drain from his expression and he would have almost definitely walked out had I not said, "jk"
retsaoter
Nabu may have conditions which allow greater O2 density in its water. It may also be possible that the jedi are using tech that breaks H2O
AustinITguy
I actually assumed they were using air compressed to a degree we cannot achieve yet.
AsYouCanSeeTheresNothingToSee
This. Exactly this.
IwishIhadadogsoIcouldnamehimDog
Naboo*
rebmcr
You can use electrolysis to crack apart H2O molecules though, you do not need to rely on the dissolved O2.
eggmuffin
I love it when people think of a slight objection in ten seconds and continue working on the assumption that no one else thought of it.
AEIOUMadden
Yea chemistry! Take that physicist!
TheOneThatFaps
You will still need to supplement the O2 generated with an inert gas (nitrogen/helium) to provide the gas at the correct partial pressure.
HauldrenCollider
That has enormous energy requirements.
rebmcr
I'm sure at some point we'll invent an ultra-battery or something.
HauldrenCollider
Unless the battery approaches the energy density of a nuclear reactor, nope. Conventional submarines don't even produce enough electricity.
eldorel
A 9-volt battery can produce enough current to split water into hydrogen/oxygen. All US nuclear submarines use electrolysis to generate O2.
Someguyfromcrowd
It's not the current, it's the voltage. The electrolysis of water into oxygen/hydrogen takes ~1.5V. However, it also takes TONS of energy.
HauldrenCollider
All US submarines are also nuclear and produce tons of power. Conventional diesel subs can't split enough water to support the crew's needs.
whatsisname
A 9-volt battery also only has enough energy to give you a second or two's worth of O2 at best.
eldorel
If you want sources, lookup "treadwell oxygen generator".
SquareZer0
The use of "it will never be a thing" bothered me. It's never gonna exist, just like man will never fly or set foot on the moon, right?
TheFurryEngineer
It is possible to fly to the moon, it's just extremely hard. This breaks the laws of physics.
wizardboy24
It doesn't break the laws of physics. It's not feasible with our current technology, but it doesn't mean it's impossible forever.
eggmuffin
This is different. This device filtering 38 liters of water per second isn't a matter of efficiency. There are physical boundaries.
SquareZer0
The same was once said about gravity. I'm not saying that I have a better idea or anything, I'm just saying positive thinking gets us places
eggmuffin
No. The same thing was never said about gravity. This is a simple matter of X number of molecules passing through a finite amount of space.
NSander
But what if it wasn't about filtering the oxygen from the water, but splitting water into Oxygen and Helium ? Then there would be plenty 1/3
Someguyfromcrowd
You mean oxygen and hydrogen, correct? It would take an infeasible amount of electricity and potentially turn you into a living bomb.
NSander
sorry, ofcoures Hydrogen. And i know it would be impractical in any way. But if energy wasn't an obstacle :) then in theory:)
NSander
2/3 of both oxygen, and "filler gas" to compensate for the Oxygen poisoning. The only requirement was enough power to split it fast enough
NSander
3/3 and somehow ensure the correct mixture of the gasses. In theory :) But never say never.
thephysicist
I just checked this at at work. I'll answer some common questions/concerns when I get home. I'm using duck as a generic trademark.
theaddicted
Could this not be used as a tool to prolong the time under the surface (not support it), or is it completely bullshit?
DrStrangeLube
I know this isn't how it was described to work, but how much water would it need to pump if you could just strip the oxygen rt off the H2O?
SomeonesPCbutNotBills
As a fellow physicist thank you for defending science
Varrick
Quick question is there any way that this could be used as a secondary device as in it refills a tank or is spliced to give a portion of O2?
thephysicist
https://ghostbin.com/paste/8y8t7
[deleted]
[deleted]
NotSoSmartAlek
see: rebreather.
Gr4ck3L
OP, would a body suit type gill setup work, or still no? Say instead of neoprene, it was fibrous gill material?
speershawks
You should tell everyone what saturation diving is. Those are super humans
halcyonfox
Can we just make like ten babies together?
chesis
http://deepseanews.com/2014/01/triton-not-dive-or-dive-not-there-is-no-triton/
youremyboyblueyouremyboy
You're like a superhero.
CaptainHanderpants
I rarely downvote, but when I do it's because someone didn't show their work. Link to/post the math and - turns to + OP
Sasbee
My idea was to have a big tank that separated the hydrogen from the oxygen in the water, and have the oxygen go to a tank for breathing.
faiora
I think the main issue is that "concept" means it's a design, and not that any research has been done as to whether it's possible. (1)
thegingerestofninjas
Can you make me a tachyon?
faiora
But, there may be other ways the design could work in the far future. It's pre-emptive to say it can't work at all, ever. (2)
DeadSchrodinger
What if we modified our blood cells to transport and store more oxygen, thereby reducing our overall need for oxygen. Is there a threshold?
DeadSchrodinger
At which the technology would work?
StefanDeWynter
what about splitting the water into hydrogen and oxygen? would that work?
tiikki
I also work in a project measuring cosmic ray muons :)
SleepingWalrus
You say it's impossible, but dreaming has been the creation of invention since the beginning.
knight76
This might have been asked but, How do fish gills work, and why can't we make artificial ones?
iamthatllama
Thank you for this! Yanko is full of interesting ideas but I'm so tired of people sending me their links that think they are real products.
Yamasama
I'm curious if you could link something to me about oxygen toxicity. I work in cancer and hyperbaric 100% oxygen chambers are used.
alice88wa
Hey, I know you're flooded right now but thanks so much for this. Even though it completely crushes a short story idea I've been brewing :)
thatclimbingguy
Where can I subscribe to your channel?
NanoPi
I'd like to be able to do this on imgur.
WhatsAJib
Have you heard about liquid breathing? It sounds very futuristic. Is it plausible? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing#Diving
demut
How come you are so sure that this will NEVER (you words) be a thing?
peacepossum
I just want to say thank you. This thing didn't jive with me in the first place and I normally find Imgur frontpage stuff to be...
peacepossum
...irritating and circlejerky but you rectified the first of those problems and handily avoided the second. Great job!
saxdiver
+1 for doubles and 5 stage bottles in the 5th picture, and for not being a total stroke. Also for physics!
notifl1
Say this would would only be used for like a looking at coral reef type situation so only like 1-2m deep. How big, how much power and ...
notifl1
... how much water would need to be filtered to make it viable. Ignore human carrying capacity, I just want to know how crazy it would be.
IcyhotFeelsNice
Muons are not cosmic rays. What you have there is scintolating material that can be used to detect muons which are particles.
IcyhotFeelsNice
Muons strictly speaking arent cosmic either. The lifetime of a muon is about 2.2e-7 seconds so at c they travel about 66 meters before decay
Theworldisaplace
I believe he was speaking in layman's terms.
pianomikey
Thanks Dr. Physicist. One more question: how much ocean water does a large animal with gills (say a mans-zed shark) have to filter per min?
DeadSchrodinger
Good question. This breather thing is bogus, but I can't give up on the idea of humans eventually breathing underwater indefinitely.
AlexDesilets
The problem lies in our metabolic rate, sea faring creatures use less energy per lb of body mass
REV076
Legit question, what about possiblities with nanotech, do you still think it's impossible to create such device ?
DeadSchrodinger
Or modifying our blood cells to hold and transport more oxygen, thereby reducing the need for oxygen?
CaptainScarfish
Nanotech is just a word for small things. The volume of water needed to pass through this device would be the same.
REV076
I know but combining with bio-engineering dont you think we cant get some nanosystem, works on similar way with fish, other sea creatures ?
CaptainScarfish
No. We'd have to change our metabolism to require the same amount of oxygen as fish, which is a whole other problem.
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
THE PHYSICIST. We could use more people like you around here! That was a good read, man. +1
eNon
As someone who earned 16k+ imgur rep before switching to Reddit, the smart people are there, not here. Top comment always debunks the junk.
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
Wow, really was your first anything on imgur. I was going to upvote everything you got, but I guess I already did. I'll hit you up later.
nation543
i'm glad that somebody debunked this thing - i had a feeling that something was fishy. pun intended.
solaslunas
But... but... I WANTED IT TO BE REAL
kungfuman
A counterpart to chemistryodoc.
DeadlyRicochet
physicsdoc
DonerKebabWithAWig
GordonFreeman
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
NOTE: I didn't mean "we need more people to prove others wrong", I'd like to clarify what I meant was educational AS WELL AS interesting OC.
mattikuss
Fuck yea! I was the thousandth upvote. Self high five.
cavemammajamma
I swear I'm not majoring in physics and mathematics just to debunk pseudoscience. I promise!
cavemammajamma
Actually, I'm minoring in secondary education, so I can teach the kiddies to question everything, so THEY can debunk stuff...
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
We should have a Science-Off. Users should post one science article on President'sDay & most points wins. Reply to sign up or suggest posts?
SuperGroy
I specialize in ultrafast optics. +1 for lasers!
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
There you go, I'd read about that!
RockTheBeaker
I specialize in brains and development
Nyphur
Except accepting this blindly is just as bad because he didn't provide any sources or maths to back himself up. His numbers are way off.
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
Except, neither did you. Am I supposed to just trust you now? At least he wrote something compelling. I have nothing to base your reply on.
ATSword
Nyphur is merely pointing out healthy skepticism is worthwhile. Is he really required to provide proof for healthy skepticism?
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
I get your point, but the very nature of his post was "don't believe everything you read." Almost "don't trust him, trust me."
ATSword
I agree his last sentence does suggest that. Fair enough.
mattikuss
He's wrong in his math (I can explain, yes) but it still would be a lot of water to filter, definitely not 38 L/second... more like 7.7L/sec
[deleted]
[deleted]
Stonemoose
Also - you'd need to mix it obvs... So you'd need a tank of nitrogen anyway. (2/2)
Holydarkness
which would mean that, e.g. a back-worn piece with similar technological concept would be viable to certain depts?
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
I'm definitely intrigued. This would make for a great debate and I'd like to witness!
mattikuss
5/? then (0.2/22.4)*0.5 = .0044 moles of O2 per breath of air. Still with me? Good. Back to the water: At 0.0004mol O2/L of water
mattikuss
2/? Conc. of O2 in ocean water is closer to 0.4mol/M3, or 0.0004mol/L at a dive-able depth (although at the surface the conc. of O2 is very
mattikuss
4/? The mole fraction of O2 in air @ STP is about 0.2 mole and 1 mole air = 22.4 liters and a single breath by his calculation is 0.5 liters
mattikuss
7/? to utilize O2 in each breath is anywhere from 17-24%, so we really only need about 1.5 – 3 L of water to keep us kicking…
mattikuss
8/? Like I said, still a lot, but def not 190L. Now, this is clearly an oversimplification because pure O2 is toxic to humans anyway
mattikuss
6/? we would need to “breathe” 11 L of water to recover .0044 moles of O2, which isn’t even necessary because our pulmonary efficiency
mattikuss
3/? similar to air so this concept may work for surface swimming… it has to do with gas exchange). Just for fun I’ll use the 0.0004mol/L.
mattikuss
Why are you bastards downvoting me!?! *Angrily shakes fist toward the heavens* I just want to watch the world learn *breaks down in tears*
GreenFairyBoss
I feel you bro
mattikuss
1/? First I gotta say, we all read the part of the original post that said this is an art concept… right? Anyway… science:
WhatIfImReallyConspiracyKeanu
THIS GUY! I know people come here to unwind but I feel as if we don't have enough content from you either!
mattikuss
9/9 and our atmosphere is primarily nitrogen. Aaaaand, I'm never going to get the time back I wasted on this shit... FML
EntropyEJ
1/? So design this thing in such a way that it retains all the air exhaled, replacing carbondioxide with extracted oxygen. And assume 50%...
EntropyEJ
3/3 Then this thing might actually be possible to construct. Not considering power req. and thrust generated by displaced water.
EntropyEJ
2/3 oxygen extraction efficiency. It would need a volume of .5L + scrubbing system and pump. And would only have to pump 50 L/min.
Stonemoose
Humans breathe 7-8L of air per minute. 20% is oxygen. So that's 1.6L of oxygen per minute? Water is 1/3 oxygen? What am I misunderstanding?
mattikuss
lol... a lot. In short, on a molecular level, yes, 1/3 of the atoms are O, but that's not what humans breathe. We breathe O2.
Stonemoose
And you'd need a tank of nitrogen on your back too... But why can't the oxygen be filtered? The figures seem wrong. Plz explain. :)
mattikuss
1 Oxygen that is bound to two hydrogens (H2O) is not available to breathe. My figures are based on the bioavailability of O2 in ocean water
mattikuss
2 which is much less than your simplified 1/3. Also, even your train of thought "water is 1/3 oxygen" is wrong, the atomic mass of O is
mattikuss
3 much greater than H (O is 16, H is 1). There are more things at play here than a simple H2O equation. How old are you, son?
Stonemoose
Thanks mum... I'm 40 and shoot me for not knowing the atomic mass of Oxygen :p