I got an e-mail advertising 3rd. Ed. of Weinke (2008) for $41. Any opinions on this book? Anyone seen the 3rd Ed.?
Jim
 |
Weinke Book Basic Decompression 3rd Ed.
I got an e-mail advertising 3rd. Ed. of Weinke (2008) for $41. Any opinions on this book? Anyone seen the 3rd Ed.?
Jim
There was a very positive review of it on some other forum (can't remember whether it was TDS or something else) and it's on my shopping list.
"What other sport is there where a cute woman has trouble getting rid of her underwear?" Doppler
I find his books a little too math/theory heavy but everyone is different.
heehee...
A deco theory book all math heavy? GET OUT!!!!!!!!Originally Posted by breals
Some folks love that stuff. They roll around and soak in it until they're all pruney.
---
Ken
You've got some new momentum - you better keep on going
Tomorrow soon will be your yesterday
You've got some new momentum - you better keep on going
You've got to move to make it all the way... - NM
Paging: Gene
Sounds like I'll be buying it.
The next comments will put most people to sleep. The problem with decompression theory is that it is inherently non-equilibrium thermodynamics, the nether-world where kinetics and equilibrium properties intermingle. Its hard, incompletely understood, and generally not taught even in graduate physical chemistry curricula.
A lot of things that look hard appear so due to poor presentation or communication. This one is really hard, and its still not clear to me that even the models used to describe bubble formation and growth are even technically applicable for a human body where nucleation and growth could be heterogeneous (on a surface or particle) as opposed to homogeneous (as in a continuous fluid phase). I still haven't gotten close enough to understanding what people really are representing in these theories, and I keep hearing I should read through Weinke's books, so time to do that.
From what little I know about deco theory I like the idea of taking a sound theoretical model for bubbles in a homogeneous fluid and then parametizing it with the parameters determined empirically using ultrasound measurements on test subjects. Such a semi-empirical approach would seem to embrace both what we can compute from first principles and what we can measure for living vertebrates.
I said I'd put you to sleep.
Jim
Then this book is for you:A deco theory book all math heavy? GET OUT!!!!!!!!
Some folks love that stuff. They roll around and soak in it until they're all pruney.
---
Kenhttp://www.amazon.com/Technical-Divi.../dp/0941332977
It starts with calculus, which I haven't done since college, on approx page 40 and isn't practical in the least.
Attached is an excerpt.
The excerpt is simple classical mechanics on precession -- completely irrelevant -- apparently this book has gravitation, plate tectonics and a random smattering of other non diving related "sciency stuff". Is this book essentially just "Cliff Notes" from college physical science courses? The excerpt on Amazon.com reads like Cliff Notes for an undergraduate P-Chem course. Its all basic gas law stuff with no diving context and no indication of any insight. Cut and paste the equations. The TOC shows that some of it looks diving related but there is enough here that looks like showing off about random science stuff to make me very suspicious. Plate tectonics. Give me a break. The index has Hubble's constant, baryon, relativistic mass, Feynman's conjecture, etc., etc. I know all of this stuff. In the context of diving its smoke and mirrors. Pure BS.
No wonder the dive community can't understand decompression theory. Garbage in - garbage out.
Jim
C'mon LAJim . . .if you want to use a Refrigerator, or drive a car --do you really want to read a treatise on the Carnot Cycle to justify your operation of such?
Just take a class on Ratio Deco, practice applying it . . .and for God's sake go diving!
"There are no mistakes. The events we bring upon ourselves, no matter how unpleasant, are necessary in order to learn what we need to learn; whatever steps we take, they're necessary to reach the places we've chosen to go."
Decompression is as close to voodoo magic as you're ever going to get in the scientific community.
Let me be clearer. The diving community has been very poorly served if this is one of the best books we have on deco theory. We have been made fun of. We should be angry. We deserve better.
Bubble formation and growth is not the toughest problem chemists and chemical engineers work on. The theoretical foundation for this can be explained in terms that many members of the diving community can understand and benefit from, even if the detailed calculations are not rigorous for physiological conditions vs. ideal homogeneous media.
Kevrumbo - the Carnot cycle is how we know that the efficiency of a heat engine in a car (or a steam engine) will never exceed thirty-some percent, but the efficiency of a fuel cell can approach 100%. So, if you design engines for cars, yes you do need to understand the Carnot cycle. Ditto for refrigerators. Basic drivers don't read books on thermodynamics, and basic divers don't need books on decompression theory. Technical divers need books on decompression theory that are not BS. This book on technical diving (not the decompression theory book cited in the OP, by the same author), based on the excerpts published on Amazon, and the above posted excerpt on precessional motion, is a misrepresentation of the science essential to understanding decompression theory.
This is embarrassing. I am embarrassed. Surely there is a book out there that is a serious discussion of the science behind deco theory, written by someone who at least understands what he is writing. Where is it?
Jim
Here's a start Jim,
Read the monograph and pick a book from the References at the back. . .(knock yourself out). After you're done studying esoteric First Principles, get out there and start having fun diving again. . .
"There are no mistakes. The events we bring upon ourselves, no matter how unpleasant, are necessary in order to learn what we need to learn; whatever steps we take, they're necessary to reach the places we've chosen to go."
Kev, lighten up a little! Some of us find knowing a bit more of the deep background on what we're doing enriches the experience of doing it. Besides, you have to have something to do with yourself when you AREN'T diving, right?
"What other sport is there where a cute woman has trouble getting rid of her underwear?" Doppler
Geez Lynne . . .rub it in why don't ya~!
(Already went diving this past weekend, AMA!!! I felt I needed cold-water immersion/pressure type alternative therapy to help with my pain management. . .)
"There are no mistakes. The events we bring upon ourselves, no matter how unpleasant, are necessary in order to learn what we need to learn; whatever steps we take, they're necessary to reach the places we've chosen to go."
From a different perspective -- alas, the argument from authority (I apologize to my friends for this). I have an endowed chair in physical chemistry at a major research university. The math is kid stuff, the science I grew up on. The posted material from this book on technical diving tells me that much of it is complete BS. The table of contents and index shows that it is loaded with irrelevant crap thrown in with the effect and result of convincing most technical divers, all of whom are very smart people, that decompression is "voo-doo science" and not worth study.
I can see why some people have lost hope of understanding deco theory. The book is not written to educate but rather to impress and intimidate. Any expert can do this to most non-experts. In this case I would say that a non-expert enthusiast may have done it. its that bad.
Divers have a right to be bothered by this. I can, and maybe should assume a professional responsibility to be very bothered by this.
And for the record I've made four dives in the past week, with gas switches, so I'm not too diving deprived at the moment.
Next step - I'm going to go ahead and buy and read (all of) some of these books. Look for detailed reports some time in the future. Maybe the technical diving book is an anomaly.
Jim
Reply With Quote