It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Triton Gills!!! It's Finally Produced!!!

page: 6
42
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 02:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Most who are more than they seem...
are portrayed to be less significant than they were/are purposefully...




posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: 5StarOracle

Ah. more than they seem, most who are...
To be less significant than they were/are purposefully are portrayed, you say. Yeesssssss.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 05:08 AM
link   
As a diver I want to comment on this gadget.
I think the depth regulations of 15ft (~5m) are there because the device filters ogygen. Pure oxygen get´s poisonous around 6m water depth. If you go diving between the 0-35m range, you can use normal pressurized air.

A 12L(220bar) scuba tank will give a normal sized, normal breathing male around 90 minutes in 10m depth, leaving around 70-80 bar left in the bottle for reserve and corrosion protection of the bottle.

But it´s there not only for breathing, but also taring yourself out when you switch depths. You need to have air reserves. Also, you can´t use neopren with this device. You would need lead to stay down, and at a certain depth, you would sink down faster and faster. Then you would need a reserve of pressurized air to refill the pockets of your diving jacket. Otherwise you will drown pretty quickly.
edit on 24-3-2016 by verschickter because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: SirKonstantin

originally posted by: Box of Rain
Let's assume for a minute that this is a real and working product (something of which I am skeptical),



Clearly you haven't click on the links provided, You haven't Read any specs from the links provided, Nor have you watched the video from the links provided.

So before you post, Please...Click on the Link Provided before posting....

Regards,


Not true. I did in fact read the technical information and watch the video. That's why in my post I asked the question (which you failed to include when you quoted my post, and failed to respond to) about the other substances besides oxygen gas that could get inhaled.

That question I asked in my post was:

If this breather (according to the technical literature) has holes that are large enough to allow the dissolved oxygen gas that is in water/seawater in to my lungs, but small enough to keep the water molecules out, then what else is able to get in through the holes? What other substances that may be dissolved in the water am I taking into my lungs? Is it anything bad?

Can you answer that, please?

By the way, just because a claim about a product (any product) includes technical specs and videos, that doesn't necessarily mean the product really works as claimed. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn't.


OK, I am an environmental chemist I will tangle this.. The "CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics" gives us molecule sizes but I am not going to go dig out the numbers at this point. This is my classroom type example but I can go to that source and find some molecules smaller than Oxygen-Oxygen, O2. For the record, Hydrogen H2 and Helium He2 molecules are not big. Carbon Dioxide, Metals and radioactive particles are too big. Nitrogen N2 is too big. Pollutants will all be too big if it is pollution.

This device is a win-win for usability of clean O2 to reach your lungs. Now, if we can balance the poisoning affect. It influences the scuba tank preparation. SCUBA tanks have to have a balance of N2 based on the depth to counter the effects on the divers. Chemist have been using a special filter called Millipore to take denatured de-ionized H2O that only allows water molecules or smaller to pass through. Water molecules, as were pointed out in this article, is a bigger molecule than O2. O2 is an even smaller molecule than the size of the holes in the millipore filter but not unrealistic from my standpoint.
edit on 24-3-2016 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: yorkshirelad

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: SirKonstantin

Remarkable technology but why does it only function to 15 feet of depth? Needs to be improved somewhat in any later models produced.

The deeper you go the less oxygen there is in the water. There is also increased pressure which may affect performance.

No idea if this is fake or not. The volume of Oxygen we need versus the volume extracted by the device (given it's size) seems to be a huge disconnect. I may be wrong I hope I am.


The pressure goes nuts on you at 15 feet and the ability to force O2 should be easier but you have to pull it through. That is my guess on the depth limits, for now.

Now that we have this device starting to appear to be set for commercial availability, I have to wonder what the Seal Teams have???



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Ghost147

"the machine
that we built
would never save us"
thats what they say
(thats why they aint coming with us today)
and they also said
"its impossible for man
to live and breath underwater..
forever" was their main complaint
(yeah)
and they also threw this in my face:
they said
anyway
you know good well
it would be beyond the will of God
and the grace of the King
(grace of the King yeah yeah)




KUDOS to Phage for this one!!

1000 star find
edit on 24-3-2016 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: WeAre0ne

I wasn't actually arguing that it was possible.

A member suggested that 'There has never been an invention that has been said to be impossible and then turned out to be feasible', which is just a ridiculous concept.




posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: SirKonstantin

originally posted by: Box of Rain
Let's assume for a minute that this is a real and working product (something of which I am skeptical),



Clearly you haven't click on the links provided, You haven't Read any specs from the links provided, Nor have you watched the video from the links provided.

So before you post, Please...Click on the Link Provided before posting....

Regards,


Not true. I did in fact read the technical information and watch the video. That's why in my post I asked the question (which you failed to include when you quoted my post, and failed to respond to) about the other substances besides oxygen gas that could get inhaled.

That question I asked in my post was:

If this breather (according to the technical literature) has holes that are large enough to allow the dissolved oxygen gas that is in water/seawater in to my lungs, but small enough to keep the water molecules out, then what else is able to get in through the holes? What other substances that may be dissolved in the water am I taking into my lungs? Is it anything bad?

Can you answer that, please?

By the way, just because a claim about a product (any product) includes technical specs and videos, that doesn't necessarily mean the product really works as claimed. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn't.


OK, I am an environmental chemist I will tangle this.. The "CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics" gives us molecule sizes but I am not going to go dig out the numbers at this point. This is my classroom type example but I can go to that source and find some molecules smaller than Oxygen-Oxygen, O2. For the record, Hydrogen H2 and Helium He2 molecules are not big. Carbon Dioxide, Metals and radioactive particles are too big. Nitrogen N2 is too big. Pollutants will all be too big if it is pollution.

This device is a win-win for usability of clean O2 to reach your lungs. Now, if we can balance the poisoning affect. It influences the scuba tank preparation. SCUBA tanks have to have a balance of N2 based on the depth to counter the effects on the divers. Chemist have been using a special filter called Millipore to take denatured de-ionized H2O that only allows water molecules or smaller to pass through. Water molecules, as were pointed out in this article, is a bigger molecule than O2. O2 is an even smaller molecule than the size of the holes in the millipore filter but not unrealistic from my standpoint.

edit on 24-3-2016 by Mackensteff because: (no reason given)



As an environmental chemist you haven't answered the key question, that being the ability to extract enough oxygen from water to support human life. Just think about it, if it was possible for mammals to breathe under water nature would have found a way first. Don't bring up the argument about sharks, let's stick closer to the evolutionary tree. This is a nice science fiction concept, but I promise, and will stake any scientific credit I have as a Ph.D. chemist that this will not work in the form factor shown. It is possible to extract dissolved oxygen from water as describe by others, but this product as shown is a scam. The only way I could see this working in the form factor shown is if they are using electrolysis to split the oxygen from water, but I am also confident the power source necessary to accomplish this at a rate to support human respiration under such metabolic demanding conditions as swimming under water is not yet in existence.

edit on 24-3-2016 by Mackensteff because: A newbie to commenting

edit on 24-3-2016 by Mackensteff because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Wow that's just so cool to have..

So when this is on the market we will see almost nobody on the surface of swimming pools anymore.

It's also a great tool for emergency kits on board of ships and planes I guess



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin

Cheers.

I posted a thread on this some time ago, and the idea was well received back then too.

They got it together quite quickly didn't they, prototype to finished product.

This is going to be such a boon to everyone from divers, to sailors, to cavers...imagine how free they'll be not having to haul big tanks around through tiny cave spaces.

Then there's the applications for the military...seals etc.
edit on 24 3 2016 by MysterX because: added text



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

Finally, a reasonable individual. Good job buddy.

I agree that the applications will be exponential.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mackensteff

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: SirKonstantin

originally posted by: Box of Rain
Let's assume for a minute that this is a real and working product (something of which I am skeptical),



Clearly you haven't click on the links provided, You haven't Read any specs from the links provided, Nor have you watched the video from the links provided.

So before you post, Please...Click on the Link Provided before posting....

Regards,


Not true. I did in fact read the technical information and watch the video. That's why in my post I asked the question (which you failed to include when you quoted my post, and failed to respond to) about the other substances besides oxygen gas that could get inhaled.

That question I asked in my post was:

If this breather (according to the technical literature) has holes that are large enough to allow the dissolved oxygen gas that is in water/seawater in to my lungs, but small enough to keep the water molecules out, then what else is able to get in through the holes? What other substances that may be dissolved in the water am I taking into my lungs? Is it anything bad?

Can you answer that, please?

By the way, just because a claim about a product (any product) includes technical specs and videos, that doesn't necessarily mean the product really works as claimed. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn't.


OK, I am an environmental chemist I will tangle this.. The "CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics" gives us molecule sizes but I am not going to go dig out the numbers at this point. This is my classroom type example but I can go to that source and find some molecules smaller than Oxygen-Oxygen, O2. For the record, Hydrogen H2 and Helium He2 molecules are not big. Carbon Dioxide, Metals and radioactive particles are too big. Nitrogen N2 is too big. Pollutants will all be too big if it is pollution.

This device is a win-win for usability of clean O2 to reach your lungs. Now, if we can balance the poisoning affect. It influences the scuba tank preparation. SCUBA tanks have to have a balance of N2 based on the depth to counter the effects on the divers. Chemist have been using a special filter called Millipore to take denatured de-ionized H2O that only allows water molecules or smaller to pass through. Water molecules, as were pointed out in this article, is a bigger molecule than O2. O2 is an even smaller molecule than the size of the holes in the millipore filter but not unrealistic from my standpoint.



As an environmental chemist you haven't answered the key question, that being the ability to extract enough oxygen from water to support human life. Just think about it, if it was possible for mammals to breathe under water nature would have found a way first. Don't bring up the argument about sharks, let's stick closer to the evolutionary tree. This is a nice science fiction concept, but I promise, and will stake any scientific credit I have as a Ph.D. chemist that this will not work in the form factor shown. It is possible to extract dissolved oxygen from water as describe by others, but this product as shown is a scam. The only way I could see this working in the form factor shown is if they are using electrolysis to split the oxygen from water, but I am also confident the power source necessary to accomplish this at a rate to support human respiration under such metabolic demanding conditions as swimming under water is not yet in existence.

But if it is possible why argue with how weak it is when prototypes are merely step one? The bottom line is it is not Aqualungs yet but it is a step toward them. We might not be able to ever go past 15 ft with the enormous pressure from the water column, but if we can do that it will be fun.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin

Lol! "Reasonably minded" by your book means ignoring the physical impossibilities and going for feels over reals.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman
But if it is possible why argue with how weak it is when prototypes are merely step one? The bottom line is it is not Aqualungs yet but it is a step toward them. We might not be able to ever go past 15 ft with the enormous pressure from the water column, but if we can do that it will be fun.


Why accept it at face value? The bottom line is, there is a physical bar to it right off the bat.

The amount of dissolved oxygen per volume of water is commonly known. The rate of oxygen consumption of adults under moderate load is also known. Put the two together, and you'll immediately see it isn't going to work.

The rest of it is just window dressing for the marks.



posted on Mar, 24 2016 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: HolgerTheDane2
And perhaps you should consider the dissolved oxygen in water. In particular the amount of it.

Some have mentioned that you need to 90 litres of water per minute to extract enough oxygen. Not to mention that breating pure oxygen is not a good idea.
Scuba divers breathe compressed air and sometimes a mixture with about 35% oxygen.


Breathing pure oxygen for short periods is fine. We did it in plenty of early space capsules. Even moreso considering the ultra-short timeframes here.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 02:44 AM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin

Nope, it's a farce and a scam.

www.metabunk.org...



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

...You just took my hopes out back like old yeller with this up-to-date link...



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: SirKonstantin
a reply to: Chadwickus

...You just took my hopes out back like old yeller with this up-to-date link...


The science used in the older debunking posts hasn't changed as others have noted earlier, so this up-to-date link is still using the same science argument against this product. The date of the link should not matter, the science isn't going to change. Just don't let anyone convince you this will work when an up-to-date model is released in the future.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin

All around
from your avatar to the post it self!!!!!!!



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: eldemie
a reply to: SirKonstantin

All around
from your avatar to the post it self!!!!!!!


^^^ I like this guy ^^^^



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join