this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
295 points (97.1% liked)

Cool Guides

4685 readers
1 users here now

Rules for Posting Guides on Our Community

1. Defining a Guide Guides are comprehensive reference materials, how-tos, or comparison tables. A guide must be well-organized both in content and layout. Information should be easily accessible without unnecessary navigation. Guides can include flowcharts, step-by-step instructions, or visual references that compare different elements side by side.

2. Infographic Guidelines Infographics are permitted if they are educational and informative. They should aim to convey complex information visually and clearly. However, infographics that primarily serve as visual essays without structured guidance will be subject to removal.

3. Grey Area Moderators may use discretion when deciding to remove posts. If in doubt, message us or use downvotes for content you find inappropriate.

4. Source Attribution If you know the original source of a guide, share it in the comments to credit the creators.

5. Diverse Content To keep our community engaging, avoid saturating the feed with similar topics. Excessive posts on a single topic may be moderated to maintain diversity.

6. Verify in Comments Always check the comments for additional insights or corrections. Moderators rely on community expertise for accuracy.

Community Guidelines

By following these rules, we can maintain a diverse and informative community. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for contributing responsibly!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
JCSpark@lemmy.ca
295
A time traveler's survival guide. The vertical green bars are the only times in Earth's history with enough oxygen to breathe (hypoxia) and low enough to avoid oxygen toxicity (hyperoxia). (files.catbox.moe)
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by j4k3@lemmy.world to c/coolguides@lemmy.ca
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperoxia

This was a screenshot I took months ago while watching a Geology Hub upload on YT. It was a lightbulb moment for my understanding of mass extinction events, (the largest was 250ma). I've referenced this multiple times, so thought I might share. Perhaps you find it as interesting as I do.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 38 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Also someone like a proper Sherpa sherpa from the Himalayas can function with oxygen that's comparable to 7% sea level oxygen.

And there are towns with elevation so high the oxygen is equivalent to 15% sea level oxygen.

So this chart has pretty narrow limits. Sure, the legend does specify "breathe forever unaided", but someone like a well accustomed sherpa who regularly climbs Mt Everest would have a much wider range than 20-25%

[–] Beryl@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

There are 850k people living in La Paz, Bolivia with the equivalent of 13.2% sea level oxygen and they seem to be doing just fine.

[–] joelfromaus@aussie.zone 5 points 4 months ago

No, no. I’ve seen the chart. They’re definitely dead by now.

[–] tal 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

kagis

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/thj9zj/could_a_human_survive_on_a_planet_with_a_thinner/

So, the answer is yes. The term "partial pressure" is often heard in this topic: as long as at least 0.2 bar of pressure are produced by oxygen alone, then you can add as much (or as little) as you want of a diluent gas on top of it. Of course this diluent gas has to be inert enough to avoid interfering with respiration, e.g. helium or nitrogen.

I don't think that that's authoritative as a lower limit -- the guy is just saying that what matters is the partial pressure of oxygen. Assuming that that is right...

There is an upper limit on the partial pressure of oxygen. Above 1.6 bars oxygen toxicity becomes a problem.

Yup an a scuba diver, 1.6 at rest is the most we use while decompressing. 1.4 is the recommendation while exercising and 1.2 if you're doing a long dive.

The military, as I understand it can push up to 2.0, but they have people that are super fit & they test people for oxygen tolerance too.

These aren't gonna be hard limits, though, just maximums on what you'd subject a person to intentionally.

https://www.checkyourmath.com/convert/pressure/atmospheres_bars.php

There are 1.01325 bars in an atmosphere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_zone

The concentration of oxygen (O2) in air is 20.9% so the partial pressure of O2 (PO2) at sea level is about 21.2 kPa (6.3 inHg; 3.07 psi).

Humans have survived for 2 years at 5,950 m (19,520 ft) [475 millibars (14.0 inHg; 6.89 psi) of atmospheric pressure], which appears to be near the limit of the permanently tolerable highest altitude.[13]

So "normal" at sea level is 1 atmosphere, with 20.9% of that being oxygen.

If WP is correct, we can get down to 46% of that partial pressure of oxygen at normal atmospheric mix at sea level (though we couldn't be climbing mountains then, would cut into our survivable altitude range). So we could get down to 9.614% atmospheric oxygen and be okay at sea level.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity

Lambertsen concluded in 1987 that 0.5 bar (50 kPa) could be tolerated indefinitely.

So that'd be 50.7% oxygen, or about 2.42 times the partial pressure of oxygen at sea level.

Going off that range -- 9.614% to 50.7% oxygen at sea level -- we could handle all of the oxygen levels on the chart. But two important caveats:

  • That's only at sea level. The "dead zone" altitude on mountains and such would drop when the oxygen level is lower than it is in the current atmosphere.

  • We probably wouldn't perform as well as we do today towards the extremes. It might be survivable, but "survivable" can be a long way from "biologically optimal".

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We probably wouldn't perform as well as we do today towards the extremes. It might be survivable, but "survivable" can be a long way from "biologically optimal".

I often wonder about this. Is the increase in CO2 making us dumber?

I'm certain the micro plastics and forever chemicals are messing with us majorly. It's causing more than just higher cancer rates, but all these things are hard to tease out, especially since global we're all being exposed to so many new poisons over the same time periods. It's in the rain, the soil, the oceans, and everywhere else

It all just makes me think - how much potential are we each losing to subtle effects of pollution?

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago

I'd think that the aerosolized lead from leaded gasoline did far worse than any plastic or change in CO₂. There's still lots of volatile pollutants, like CO and hexavalent-anything out there.