View Full Version : Scuba Mask Creates Breathable Oxygen Underwater
Snaquebite
01-15-2014, 06:21
It extracts oxygen under water through a filter in the form of fine threads with holes smaller than water molecules.
- This is a technology developed by a Korean scientist that allows us to freely breathe under water for a long time.
- Using a very small but powerful micro compressor, it compresses oxygen and stores the extracted oxygen in storage tank.
- The micro compressor operates through micro battery.
- The micro battery is a next-generation technology with a size 30 times smaller than current battery that can quickly charge 1,000 times faster."
http://www.minds.com/blog/view/269672871016534016/revolutionary-scuba-mask-creates-breathable-oxygen-underwater-on-its-own
I read about this yesterday. Looks like a COOL civi toy, for a 1st release..
My worry would be:
"can the battery be changed at depth??"
I'm tossing the bullshit card out there.
Not enough surface area for a
"gill" membrane gas exchange.
There simply isn't enough oxygen dissolved
in that small volume of water in/around the
"gill tubes" to sustain life.
Of course, since it is either unpressurized
or at best weakly pressured, it would be
useless at depth.
I seem to remember earlier versions of membranes
that could execute an O2 - H2O exchange, they needed
the square footage of a baseball diamond to supply enough
O2 (and vent the excess H2O) of an adult man.
An interesting technical lab trick, but useless.
My thoughts also. One breath would deplete the tanks and there is no way it can convert oxygen quick enough to support life.
I had the impression they "cooked" the o out of filtered h2o via electrolysis. If so, there is lots of o in h2o,, but the battery power(or battery size) to extract the o would be enormous.
If they are trying to filter free o in solution, you're correct, they would never get enough from the limited filtration bits.
RichL025
01-15-2014, 14:26
Absolutely fake.
The micro battery is a next-generation technology with a size 30 times smaller than current battery that can quickly charge 1,000 times faster
If they had battery technology like that they would sell it to Energizer and retire richer than Bill Gates. There are (unfortunately) hard physical limits to what batteries can do.
As someone else alluded to, the device itself is much less volume than a normal human breath. That means, in order to work, it would have to remove dissolved oxygen from the water faster than a person could inhale!
I do not know enough about the capabilities and limitations of our technology today to have an informed opinion on if this is currently feasible...
That being said, at one time the idea of a man walking on the moon, or IIRC Benjamin Franklin's idea of Soldiers dropping behind enemy lines from the air causing chaos, semi-automatic gunfire...These were all ideas that were at one time far beyond the technological reach of humanity.
Perhaps one day this might become a reality, there is bound to be some technological principle or advance that would allow this. Thomas Edison discovered 10,000 ways not to create a lightbulb. It's why there is research and development.
Fat Albert
01-21-2014, 10:23
Doesn't pure oxygen become toxic in shallow water?
Doesn't pure oxygen become toxic in shallow water?
For individuals that are in peek condition, like SEALs and SF divers, O2 systems can be use successfully. WITH PROPER TRAINING.
This link has some of the scientific explanation(s):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity
Absolutely fake.
If they had battery technology like that they would sell it to Energizer and retire richer than Bill Gates. There are (unfortunately) hard physical limits to what batteries can do.
As someone else alluded to, the device itself is much less volume than a normal human breath. That means, in order to work, it would have to remove dissolved oxygen from the water faster than a person could inhale!
Early cell phones had to be large because of battery technology (size and life). The battery on my first Motorola Brick's battery was larger, and heavier than my cell phone today and only lasted 8 hrs in stand-by. It didn't take long for battery technology to surpass the "hard physical limits" of that time.
RichL025
01-21-2014, 13:03
Early cell phones had to be large because of battery technology (size and life). The battery on my first Motorola Brick's battery was larger, and heavier than my cell phone today and only lasted 8 hrs in stand-by. It didn't take long for battery technology to surpass the "hard physical limits" of that time.
Battery size was only partially the reason why early cell phones were so huge. Electronic things have shrunk significantly in 20 years in general, but tech geeks are acknowledging that a physical limit is being reached. While you can make a wire (for example) really, really small, and they are making them smaller and smaller, there IS a physical limit - you can't make anything smaller than one molecule thick <g>.
There is a clear point of diminishing returns with improvements in battery technology - these are improvements in _technology_, it is certainly possible that some _scientific_ discovery will be made to circumvent that, but that happens more often in Hollywood than real life
Battery technology did NOT surpass the physical limits of that time. Improvements were made in _engineering technology_. The fundamental laws of science haven't changed much (only, I admit, our understanding of them)
(By the way, "Steve Austin" the 6-million dollar man had an underwater breathing apparatus like that. And interestingly enough, as a plot device, they could not supply it with enough power without plugging it into his arm <g>)
Battery size was only partially the reason why early cell phones were so huge. Electronic things have shrunk significantly in 20 years in general, but tech geeks are acknowledging that a physical limit is being reached. While you can make a wire (for example) really, really small, and they are making them smaller and smaller, there IS a physical limit - you can't make anything smaller than one molecule thick <g>.
There is a clear point of diminishing returns with improvements in battery technology - these are improvements in _technology_, it is certainly possible that some _scientific_ discovery will be made to circumvent that, but that happens more often in Hollywood than real life
Battery technology did NOT surpass the physical limits of that time. Improvements were made in _engineering technology_. The fundamental laws of science haven't changed much (only, I admit, our understanding of them)
(By the way, "Steve Austin" the 6-million dollar man had an underwater breathing apparatus like that. And interestingly enough, as a plot device, they could not supply it with enough power without plugging it into his arm <g>)
My Motorola Account Manager showed me a cell phone in a watch, the only shortcoming was that the battery wouldn't last long enough to make it useful.
Motorola also had it's flip phone, but before they could market it they had to wait for battery technology to catch up.
Clear point!!! That's what they were saying about things I'm using today that when I was a kid were only in science fiction (Flash Gorden, etc) movies.
It sound like you haven't been on the planet very!!
RichL025
01-21-2014, 20:13
Another issue with regards to powering electronic devices - you can make (to a certain extent) the devices use less energy with miniturization & clever design. When you're talking about a brute-force electrolytic reaction, there's no shortcut to save power... it just takes a certain amount of energy and no less will work.
Imagination and thermal limitations drive technology - would be pretty cool if it works even at low depths.
I'd still wait for version 2 though