/sci/ - Science & Math

How deep do you expect this to work? Because I'm skeptical of it being useful any deeper than a swimming pool.

sag'd for stupidity

>It seems like these dead simple inflatable habitats could be mass produced and sold to governments/communities in regions expected to flood catastrophically as sea levels rise.
I laughed so fucking hard.
Are you *serious*?

>Prime Minister, the water will overflow our small shallow island within the next thirty years! What shall we do!
>We'll become a nation of bubble-dwellers!
LOL

The problem I saw with that solution is that to get anywhere, you'd need to swim from one bubble to the next. That necessitates super cheap scuba, which turns out to be a more difficult design problem than cheap undersea habitats.

My preferred alternative was biorock accretion; Growing organic coral domes around electrified metal skeletons. (pic related).

Under these conditions, coral grows along the electrified structure at 5 times the normal rate, and within 2-5 years it's sealed the dome entirely. A watertight, living structure that you can pump the water out of and live inside. If anchored to an existing coral substrate you wouldn't need to bother with ballasting it down, and you could *grow* connecting hallways between domes using the same methods you used to grow the domes themselves.

>>2297820

>>How deep do you expect this to work? Because I'm skeptical of it being useful any deeper than a swimming pool.

About 25 feet. That's the limit beyond which your tissues begin to saturate, and you can no longer return to the surface without decompressing.

>>Are you *serious*?

It wasn't my idea. See:>>2297833

But really, when brainstorming, sometimes ideas are stupid. It happens. If you can get over it, there's often interesting discussion to be had.

fucking lol'd

10/10

It's great until a sharp object comes along

>>2297848
Fine.

>>2297833
I'm skeptical of two things. Forming a seal that can hold air against the water pressure at depth, and the structural integrity of the dome under those stresses.

>>2297833
Let's make this happen,
one problem I do see though is the time required, while at the moment many houses do take 2-5 years, should anything go wrong (earthquake for instance) the repair would have to be artificial

Or, you know, maybe you could get people to live on boats or floating pontoon structures, seeing as how then the thing is mobile and doesn't have giant issues like asphyxiating everyone in their sleep if the air pump fails in the night, or all the retards who will inevitably be killed or maimed by decompression sickness because they don't know that a habitat pressurized to 10m below the water is at twice the atmospheric pressure as the surface, and you're going to get skullfucked by the tag team duo that is Henry's law and Boyle's law if they ascend to the surface quickly.

>>2297932
This. Damn it all.

How OLD are you, Mad Scientist? You don't seem to have a much of a practical common-sense.

>>2297936

>>How OLD are you, Mad Scientist? You don't seem to have a much of a practical common-sense.

27. And I'm aware this idea is a flight of fancy. That's why it's fun to think about. If you allow yourself to consider seemingly absurd ideas, and how they could be built (assuming as a premise that it is desirable to do so) you wind up expanding your horizons.

>>2297936
>>2297868
>>2297826


>HURRRR ALLLS SCIENCE CAMES FROM TEH SCIENCE BOOKS, EVERYTHING ELSE NEW AND ABSTRACT IS OBVIOUSLY STUPID AND HAS NO WAY OF WORKING SO WHY DISCUSS IT HURRRRRRR

Continuing to misunderstand how true science works, keep it classy /sci/

one major reoccurring problem I see in thin thread is the topic of decompression, but it needn't be one.
If the structure built strong enouph, it could be pressurized to 1 ATM, allowing instant travel to the surface.

Pic related: if we can get mass power storage figured out, this would be my choice. The wedges that close over the top in the event of storms are impractical. I would go with a curved iris that had its points cut off, when closed it would come in line with the watch tower, which would then clamp down on the points, slightly bending all the plates sealing it.

>>2298004
LOL
So sad. Because you get hit with a dose of reality, you pretend that uninformed flights of fancy are legitimate points of view? Even scientific? LOL

>>2298039

Because every single thought that helped einstein come up with his theorys was exactingly scientific. And because newtons apple tree is an exacting replica of how gravity works on the scale that he theorized.

Sometimes brains just need a nudge in a direction in order to get the brain storming flowing and some real ideas to come out of something totally, semi, or even completely related.

Also, gtfo of /sci/.

>bitches don't know about my pneumatic domes

>>2298033
Hey, now I like that

>>2298060
LOL
You don't know SHIT about how either of them came up with their major theories. They wrestled with understanding physical phenomena and reconciling important but seemingly contradictory ideas. Not with wondering "how can I make a car powered by unicorn farts".

>>2298039

>>So sad. Because you get hit with a dose of reality, you pretend that uninformed flights of fancy are legitimate points of view? Even scientific? LOL

I don't think they are. I think willingness to consider ideas that seem absurd on their face can lead you to valuable conclusions you might not have reached otherwise.

There are some solutions you cannot arrive at from the bottom up. You need to go top down, starting with the solution as a premise and *then* figuring out how you'd make it work.

On a personal note, why so hurtful? I don't know you, but I have nothing against you. If I've said something in the past that offended you I apologize and hope we can be on better terms going forward.

>>2298076

Your strawmen cede you this argument my friend, good tidings from the land of intelligence!

>>2297932
The easiest solution is keep them at 20' or shallower. At that depth, you can remain indefinitely without deco. Other than that if you get deco sickness, you're a fucking idiot who deserves them. There was not 30 minutes that passed in any of the dive classes I have been through (NAUI open, adv open, cavern, cave, night, nitrox, rebreather, and rescue) where they did not mention how to prevent it. This would also have the advantage of allowing you to use exotic gas blends which would be a vast improvement over compressed air. But even so, it would suck for longer periods. Dry air gets killer to breathe after a while, you'd need some humidifier setup, as well as needing a CO2 scrubber, and/or a way to bleed off the used air. Water would also have to be mid to high 90s for longish term (85 degree water can give you hypothermia a LOT faster than you'd think -- remember the high specific heat of water).

It would be amusing to see someone get narced though.

this is not a new idea

>How can I solve a problem in the most inconvenient way possible?

>>2297932
this, this, a thousand times, this

giant ships would be a million times as practical as underwater living

>>2298088

>> This would also have the advantage of allowing you to use exotic gas blends which would be a vast improvement over compressed air.

Not necessary at shallow depths. They're used for deep sea diving because the concentration of oxygen in ordinary air becomes toxic under that kind of pressure. But for shallow water colonies it would just add unnecessary cost.

>>But even so, it would suck for longer periods. Dry air gets killer to breathe after a while, you'd need some humidifier setup, as well as needing a CO2 scrubber, and/or a way to bleed off the used air.

Humidifier? Just expose the interior to the ocean via moon pool. You'd actually need a dehumidifer if anything, to keep humidity from becoming uncomfortable. CO2 removal would be necessary only if you didn't maintain a flow rate sufficient to push fresh air through the habitat (and out the moon pool) at a rate faster than the occupants could plausibly rebreathe it to the point of anoxia.

Using some kind of CO2 remover like sodasorb would reduce power requirements by reducing the necessary flow rate but it would add an ongoing expense as it needs replacement on an ongoing basis.

I agree with everything else in the post though. But is the limit really 20'? I was told 25'.

Dose of reality fag again.

This isn't so much a science problem as one of engineering and logistics. If you want cheap habitats for people who've been inundated out of house and home, why not put them on boats? They're a much more mature technology with fewer associated issues.

Undersea habitats aren't impossible, they're just tricky. For recreational amusement, sure. 5m, its all fun and games. 10m, you should get some SCUBA training. 20m? Don't expect to escape to the surface in an emergency.

You can go for the hard shell option, and then you have less of an issue with the pressure. But for that cost, why not a boat. If you're going for a soft shell option, like the OP seems to imply, you need to pressurize the thing. Then hilarity will ensue. I'm sure you can iron out a lot of the issues, but the general public isn't going to want to live in a house that's going to kill them if the plumbing fails.

>>2298033
>pneumatic dome under the sea
>pressurize it to 1 ATM

>>2298130
>Then hilarity will ensue.
I was immediately reminded of Dwarf Fortress.

I wonder if it's possible to embark near the ocean, dig out under the ocean, wall off the original fort, and build up into the ocean? I'm not sure of there's a way to displace water above the ceiling without flooding lower levels.

come on sci, this thread should be all kinds of fun.

Human habitats should we fail to prevent global warming and the majority of earths land mass dissapears beneath the sea.

But so far all we have is 3 ideas and a whole lot of bitching. Don't like an idea, propose a better one, or give improvements.

>>2298130

>>Undersea habitats aren't impossible, they're just tricky. For recreational amusement, sure. 5m, its all fun and games. 10m, you should get some SCUBA training. 20m? Don't expect to escape to the surface in an emergency.

I dive recreationally a lot so it may be a matter of limited perspective on my part, but do most people really have that much trouble surfacing from 25 feet?

>>the general public isn't going to want to live in a house that's going to kill them if the plumbing fails.

But this is an obstacle, not a brick wall. Any system has safety issues, it's a question of how you mitigate risk. Undersea habitats use triply redundant compressors and other systems for this reason.

>>2298148
>Human habitats should we fail to prevent global warming and the majority of earths land mass dissapears beneath the sea.
Wow, GTFO of /sci/. At least until you read the IPCC report. This isn't fucking Waterworld.

>>2298033
Umm, no. Odds are you're not going to be at 1atm for the trip up or down, so you will be breathing pressurized air -- thus you'll have the higher concentrations of N2 in your blood. They probably won't be high enough to cause severe deco...at first, but daily trips will cause the N2 to build up and you'll eventually get hella bends (google up some dive tables and info on flying after diving for more info on this). Also, you'd need to deco to go into the hab too. An immediate change from 2atm to 1 atm would suck. This is also far beyond the ability of the design because it counts on air to displace the water inside the structure. By necessity, this air will become compressed (and in all probability beyond the 2atm that ambient pressure will give you).

This is just a really bad idea on many, many fronts.

Science fiction. You're right, it's crazy. In fact, it's even worse than that, it's nuts. You wanna hear something really nutty? I heard of a couple guys who wanna build something called an airplane, you know you get people to go in, and fly around like birds, it's ridiculous, right? And what about breaking the sound barrier, or rockets to the moon? Atomic energy, or a mission to Mars? Science fiction, right?
Look, all I'm asking is for you to just have the tiniest bit of vision. You know, to just sit back for one minute and look at the big picture. To take a chance on something that just might end up being the most profoundly impactful moment for humanity, for the history... of history.

>>2298171
You're asking about the feasibility of low-depth underwater permanent habitats, without ANY REASON why simple SHIPS wouldn't be fine. I'll spend my time on hypothetical scenarios that have a better chance of being productive.

Made this last night for a similar discussion. I don't see how you can complain about this sort of thing, flawed as it may be, when the rest of the board is... ugh...

I'm more interested in Airships.

>>2298190
Good point. But the levels of miserably informed armchair engineering ITT are pretty infuriating.

>>2298196
Hydrogen, helium, or vacuum-filled?

>>2298203
They don't need to be maintained by buoyant force. It's a nice option though, since it doesn't require much active energy use.

>>2298156

Most of the time, no. But divers (here at least) get training so they know what the fun k they're doing and medical checks to screen out people who aren't physically suitable for diving.

25ft is pretty borderline, but there are occasional incidents where snorkelers have gotten the bends. its rare, but not impossible, and that opens up a large can of litigation whoop-ass if you deploy this thing on large scale and an accident happens. Because accidents will eventually fail.

If you're selling this thing as a habitat, then you have to expect that children, the sick and the elderly will be in them. In a pressurized undersea habitat. Where there is very little margin for error if things go wrong. Specialists deep sea habitats or shallow water recreational habitats, ok, but in every other scenario, why not a boat? There's lots of ocean. Spare isn't an issue. Why isolate people from that crucial requirement, air?

They had hard shell undersea habitats 30 years ago. There's a reason they're still only limited to specialist engineering projects and the occasional scientific foray.

>>2298126
Please don't try to correct someone who knows more about these things than you. There are exotic blends for most all situations, for instance nitrox is used to prolong shallow dives. I've been a technical diver for the last 8 years.

You'd have to copy below ground mines for air routing and have some crazy system to ensure air flows the entire circuit, which if is breeched or blocked at any point will either air starve following sections or build up used air, which along with the gasses like CO and CO2 building up would cause a pressure buildup.

But anyway, the air would be dry if you're talking about using compression systems to push it down. That air HAS to be dry or it jacks up the compressor. Passive exposure to a moon pool would not be enough to rehydrate it.

The level actually varies based off of the salinity of water, but I was also hedging on the side of safety. Which really it should be even more shallow, because even a modest thunderstorm can have a storm surge of five or so feet...

Lets run down the thread so far
>>2297812 OP,Idea, Question
>>2297820 Question
>>2297826 Bitching
>>2297829 Bitching
>>2297833 Idea, constructive critisism
>>2297848 OP
>>2297868 Bitching
>>2297881 Bitching
>>2297896 Constructive criticism
>>2297915 Constructive criticism
>>2297932 Idea
>>2297936 Bitching
>>2297949 OP
>>2298004 Bitching
>>2298033 Idea, Constructive criticism
>>2298039 Bitching
>>2298060 Bitching
>>2298063 Bitching
>>2298068 Neutral
>>2298076 Bitching
>>2298077 OP
>>2298085 Bitching
>>2298088 Constructive criticism / Ideas
>>2298093 Bitching
>>2298095 Bitching
>>2298117 Neutral
>>2298126 OP
>>2298130 Constructive criticism
>>2298135 I,ll informed Bitching
>>2298148 Bitching about the Bitching
>>2298149 Question
>>2298156 OP
>>2298161 Missing the point Bitching
>>2298165 Constructive criticism
>>2298171 Sarcastic bitching about the bitching


well I've seen worse but /sci/ can do better

>>2298213

>>Specialists deep sea habitats or shallow water recreational habitats, ok, but in every other scenario, why not a boat?

Not as cool. 100% series. For me, living underwater is desirable regardless of reason. The task now is to find reasons.

>>There's lots of ocean. Spare isn't an issue. Why isolate people from that crucial requirement, air?

Because the technologies necessary for safely and reliably supplying habitats with air have come down in price sufficiently that you can run down to a target or Home Depot and buy most of what you'd need and have it put together in a weekend. A triply redundant air compressor, aircon and dehumidification system can be assembled from affordable off the shelf products these days. Not so in the 1960s.

>>They had hard shell undersea habitats 30 years ago. There's a reason they're still only limited to specialist engineering projects and the occasional scientific foray.

Yes, there are reasons why they failed. But those obstacles have been overcome since. I recommend you read this book; It's an extended examination of why the "man in the sea" programs were abandoned and how, with modern materials and technologies, those obstacles have been overcome.

lol sharks everywhere warm enough

>>2298259 bitching about the bitching about the bitching

Was that reeeeeaaally necessary? That long-ass post? And yeah I realize I'm bitching about the bitching about the bitching about the bitching. This is getting recursive.

tl;dr: why build under the ocean instead of on top of it?

Because it's cool.

>>2298237

>>Please don't try to correct someone who knows more about these things than you. There are exotic blends for most all situations, for instance nitrox is used to prolong shallow dives. I've been a technical diver for the last 8 years.

Cool, I respect that. But telling people "Shut up, don't question me, I am an expert on this topic" is kind of presumptuous. Especially since on the internet, everyone's an expert in all topics.

For this application, a traditional diving bell style system would suffice; surface air pumped down supply hoses to each habitat and flushed continuously out the small moon pool in each.

>>You'd have to copy below ground mines for air routing and have some crazy system to ensure air flows the entire circuit, which if is breeched or blocked at any point will either air starve following sections or build up used air, which along with the gasses like CO and CO2 building up would cause a pressure buildup.

Only if you assume a network of habitats connected by tunnels. Not if we're talking about small villages of standalone habitats.

>>But anyway, the air would be dry if you're talking about using compression systems to push it down. That air HAS to be dry or it jacks up the compressor. Passive exposure to a moon pool would not be enough to rehydrate it.

This isn't true. Aquarius is fed by surface compressors, but it uses a vinyl curtain to prevent humidity from spreading to the rest of the habitat. Sealab I and II crews learned the necessity of this the hard way; The humidity on both was unbearable for long periods and led to frequent ear infections and other health issues.

>>The level actually varies based off of the salinity of water, but I was also hedging on the side of safety. Which really it should be even more shallow, because even a modest thunderstorm can have a storm surge of five or so feet...

This is a good point. But isn't the limit based on the height of your head, as that's the point of air intake? You get a few extra feet because of that, don't you?

>>2298268
Undersea base, community, city, all make sense -- not feasible, but they make sense. Individual residences or even family ones? That doesn't make sense.

>>2298302
No.
>>2298312
This thread doesn't make sense.

I'm out.

>>2298268
>Not as cool. 100% series. For me, living underwater is desirable regardless of reason. The task now is to find reasons.

I'm fucking okay with this.

reason: make money off of the the people who are like OP and will pay for this kind of experience.

i would pay for it too. just like i would pay for a high orbit experience around earth. or a re-entry personal suit dive. i see this whole idea as recreational. or "lets rent an underwater house for two weeks in Dubai and have a blast"

i apologize for the shitty sentence structure and grammar. hope you survive it.

>>2298295
it wasn't, and I apologize.
I'm just pissed that a thread with so much promise has ended in this, hell if OP phrased this in the form of a game scenario, /tg/ would have done a better job.
And i was so excited at what we might come up with

>>2298339
>hell if OP phrased this in the form of a game scenario, /tg/ would have done a better job.

Challenge accepted

>>2298339
/tg/ is fantasy. And OP is the reason this thread sucked. He could have given a hypothetical scenario in which the simpler and more effective methods sea habitation weren't doable. But he couldn't or didn't, and if you can't even IMAGINE when a problem would ever come up, working on it is fairly silly.

>>2298339
/sci/ isn't /tg/. /sci/ is /sci/, land of angry and trolling. LoAT, if you will.

Such cases.

>>2298330

>>reason: make money off of the the people who are like OP and will pay for this kind of experience.

I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this is the only viable business model for undersea living. It's what Seabase 1 in Belize is relying on. And the Atlantica 2 man colonies will also be sold as stand-alone vacation homes, something to sink just barely outside of US waters and commute to shore each day. Coastal lifestyle for a fraction of the price.

It seems like once we have a critical mass of people living underwater, even if it's for frivolous reasons, we'll start to see related benefits; None of them things we couldn't do without undersea communities, but all things that can be done undersea anyway and which benefit from having a permanent local community to tend to them. Pic very related.

>>2298349
The thread earlier about how you could have a self-contained human ecosystem underground if the sun went dark or the surface got super-cold by some other means?

THAT was an interesting thread.

>>2298317
I'm not assuming that, I'm assuming moving it through different rooms. The air needs to be in constant motion and in one direction to prevent a buildup of dangerous gasses. I'm also assuming a method to ensure that waste air is pushed to the exit point and not some method that would have to rely on the hope that more waste air is removed than new air.
>>2298311
Then they are friggen pussies. The vast majority of my life has been spent at and above 85% humidity (love the coast).

As for the pressure thing, I'm pretty sure that's only true if you're submerged. The pressure in the structure should be more or less consistent throughout the open portions

>>2298330

>>reason: make money off of the the people who are like OP and will pay for this kind of experience.

I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this is the only viable business model for undersea living. It's what Seabase 1 in Belize is relying on. And the Atlantica 2 man colony modules will also be sold as stand-alone vacation homes, something to sink just barely outside of US waters and commute to shore each day. Coastal lifestyle for a fraction of the price. It's basically what US submarines is doing to mitigate the costs of developing their Poseidon resort, selling the large disc shaped habitat modules to wealthy eccentric people who want a private undersea home, but at a price point the average person can afford.

It seems like once we have a critical mass of people living underwater, even if it's for frivolous reasons, we'll start to see related benefits; None of them things we couldn't do without undersea communities, but all things that can be done undersea anyway and which benefit from having a permanent local community to tend to them. Pic very related.

The best business model for this sort of thing is crack smuggling and you all know it.

>>2298339
the sad thing is that hes probably right, Ive seen tg come up with tons of creative solutions to problems, real or fictional.

>>2298349
and tg is not just fantasy, they do alot of scifi, which is quite relevant when talking about future technologies, alot of todays technology was imagined in scifi first

>>2298378
although i disagree, I lol'd

successful anon is successful

OP, despite being increasingly concerned with the most viable model, consider how many other ideas start out expensive and decrease in cost with further technological advances, and innovative ideas encouraged by delicious green paper. (AKA: Cheaper to meet the *extraordinary* standards of the people in this thread, and the people/governments in real world scenarios.)

capitalism doesn't always work but it can

And here we go.

>>>/tg/13403802

>>2298403
>alot of todays technology was imagined in scifi first

inb4 /sci/ disregards facts and makes a stupid ultimatum about how science fiction is either 100% fiction or you are retarded

>>2298439

I believe it can. Personal computers started out as "because it's cool" frivolities. They were originally a hobby product, sold as kits.

It's as frustrating that there were people who didn't see the potential of those hobby kits as it is that there are people who don't see the potential of a permanent ocean bottom civilization. Especially the benefits of on-site traditional farming of the sea floor rather than trawling, stuff like that.

>>2297829
Hey, I'm sure Maldives would see that as an improvement over their current situation. Pic related.

>>2298473
yeah but if your computer breaks your life isn't in any immediate danger

>>2298504
Depends on how it breaks and what you were using it for.

>>2298504

If we're going to live in space, we'll live in the sea first, as it offers most of the same benefits at a far lower cost and it opens up new resources to us that will create the wealth necessary to expand to other planets in a meaningful capacity.

If we're going to live in the sea, it needs to be made safe. The way you make it safe is with triply redundant life support systems. If one system breaks there are two more just like it as backups. On top of that, you're forgetting about backup clusters of scuba tanks. In the event of a system failure, the emergency lights come on, there's some kind of siren/buzzer, and you have hours or even days to evacuate that section for repairs.

>>2298539
how about we jettison a 40m diameter ball of water into space and build a house in the center of it.

PRESSURE PROBLEMS SOLVED

aside from obvious trolling and practical issues it would be awesome to swim in a ball of water in space

...bamp. :3

>>2298580
aside from the problem of surface tension dragging water with you when you get out of it, I'd buy stocks in it.