Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 00:00:33 -1000 (HST)
From: Richard Pyle <deepreef@bi*.bi*.Ha*.Or*>
To: "Peter N.R. Heseltine" <heseltin@hs*.us*.ed*>
Cc: Michael Menduno <73204.542@Co*.CO*>, techdiver@terra.net
Subject: Re: CCRs and the *right* computer
> On 29 Jun 1996, Michael Menduno wrote:
> 
> >  My understanding from talking to deco-guys like Hamilton, Vann, & others is
> > that we really don't know the physiology. We are relying on RWH-maxim, what
> > works, works. M2
> 
> Michael,
> 
> That's fine as long as it does work. We do lotes of things on an empiric
> basis - like eat oysters for example. Most of the time everything is fine.
> Then someone gets into a situation where the new unknown law applies
> (Murphy's) and bites us on the ass. Problem is a few bitten asses and
> everyone is cancelling insurance policies or at least not renewing them.
> That to me is the most likely result of pushing the envelope by using the
> customer as a crash-test dummy. In medical research we call this "not
> sufficiently informing the patient" In law they call it big bucks.

That's the risk we take everytime we go diving - that we may be bitten on 
the ass. Unless you were the test subject of some lenghty decompression 
study, or you have done a lot of dives and have paid close attention to 
subtle symptoms, then you can't extrapolate existing models or deco 
schemes to your own diving practices with 100% certainty. Mike is right 
about the opinions of the guys who know.  It's enlightening that, as with 
many aspects of science, the more a researcher actually knows about 
what's going on, the more he or she tends to say, "We don't really know 
what's going on."

> Maybe, just maybe out there are the answers we need. I've been given a
> leadt on a navy technical document which may have some of them. More later
> when I get a copy.

I'm always interested to read more studies, but the more I read, the 
clearer it becomes that chaotic processes are involved, which means that 
the more extreme the exposure, the less predictable the probability of 
DCI; both within and between individuals.  I think we can do better than 
we do now, especially if we understand more about bubble physics.  But I 
have to tell you that I am dubious that the answers we really need are 
actually "out there".

Aloha,
Rich

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]