If I replace my lead dive weights with gold, how much do I need?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Ryebrye

Registered
Messages
64
Reaction score
67
Location
Vermont
# of dives
25 - 49
According to the wikipedia, the specific gravity of lead is 11.35, for depleted uranium is 19.1 and for gold is 19.3. ( Relative density - Wikipedia )

I would replace all my dive weight with depleted uranium, but a person in the USA is only allowed to own 1.5kg of the stuff. ( Uranium metal 99.9% depleted U238 — Luciteria )

So rather than mix and match the metal, I'd like to just go with gold. If it normally takes me 20 lbs of lead, would the math be as simple as 20 / (19.3 / 11.35) = 11.42 lbs of gold?

Based on the current market price, that'd only cost about $348,704 - which seems like a cheap way to get more than eight pounds off of my weight belt. It'd make shore entries a bit nicer.
 

formernuke

ScubaBoard Sponsor
ScubaBoard Sponsor
Messages
3,432
Reaction score
3,127
Location
New England
# of dives
I just don't log dives
According to the wikipedia, the specific gravity of lead is 11.35, for depleted uranium is 19.1 and for gold is 19.3. ( Relative density - Wikipedia )

I would replace all my dive weight with depleted uranium, but a person in the USA is only allowed to own 1.5kg of the stuff. ( Uranium metal 99.9% depleted U238 — Luciteria )

So rather than mix and match the metal, I'd like to just go with gold. If it normally takes me 20 lbs of lead, would the math be as simple as 20 / (19.3 / 11.35) = 11.42 lbs of gold?

Based on the current market price, that'd only cost about $348,704 - which seems like a cheap way to get more than eight pounds off of my weight belt. It'd make shore entries a bit nicer.

Actual weight would be the same. Just less bulk.

Make sure you keep your dive gear very well locked up. In fact might want to hire a full time security company including body guards.
 

Graeme Fraser

Contributor
Messages
945
Reaction score
1,673
Location
Narnia
# of dives
1000 - 2499
According to the wikipedia, the specific gravity of lead is 11.35, for depleted uranium is 19.1 and for gold is 19.3. ( Relative density - Wikipedia )

I would replace all my dive weight with depleted uranium, but a person in the USA is only allowed to own 1.5kg of the stuff. ( Uranium metal 99.9% depleted U238 — Luciteria )

So rather than mix and match the metal, I'd like to just go with gold. If it normally takes me 20 lbs of lead, would the math be as simple as 20 / (19.3 / 11.35) = 11.42 lbs of gold?

Based on the current market price, that'd only cost about $348,704 - which seems like a cheap way to get more than eight pounds off of my weight belt. It'd make shore entries a bit nicer.

Or maybe 4 tablespoons of matter from the Sun, not taking into consideration displacement of course. Or perhaps 200 billionths of a tablespoon of matter from a neutron star.

Hmm, you might be on to something.
 

tursiops

Marine Scientist and Master Instructor
ScubaBoard Supporter
Scuba instructor
Messages
12,410
Reaction score
10,736
Location
U.S. East Coast
# of dives
2500 - 4999
According to the wikipedia, the specific gravity of lead is 11.35, for depleted uranium is 19.1 and for gold is 19.3. ( Relative density - Wikipedia )

I would replace all my dive weight with depleted uranium, but a person in the USA is only allowed to own 1.5kg of the stuff. ( Uranium metal 99.9% depleted U238 — Luciteria )

So rather than mix and match the metal, I'd like to just go with gold. If it normally takes me 20 lbs of lead, would the math be as simple as 20 / (19.3 / 11.35) = 11.42 lbs of gold?

Based on the current market price, that'd only cost about $348,704 - which seems like a cheap way to get more than eight pounds off of my weight belt. It'd make shore entries a bit nicer.
There might be a small misunderstanding here of buoyancy and weight....
 

formernuke

ScubaBoard Sponsor
ScubaBoard Sponsor
Messages
3,432
Reaction score
3,127
Location
New England
# of dives
I just don't log dives
Or maybe 4 tablespoons of matter from the Sun, not taking into consideration displacement of course. Or perhaps 200 billionths of a tablespoon of matter from a neutron star.

Hmm, you might be on to something.

4 tablespoons of sun matter. Then I won't need a dive light either, even less bulk.
 

davehicks

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
807
Reaction score
787
Location
Seattle
# of dives
1000 - 2499
The weight is countering the displacement of water (buoyancy) of you and your gear. Using denser weights would not reduce your displacement by more than a few ounces.

I'm thinking that for $348k you could hire any number of willing Dive Porters to carry you on a throne platform right into the surf like a Roman Emperor.
 

Ryebrye

Registered
Messages
64
Reaction score
67
Location
Vermont
# of dives
25 - 49
Actual weight would be the same. Just less bulk.

Make sure you keep your dive gear very well locked up. In fact might want to hire a full time security company including body guards.

Are you sure the weight would be the same? I thought the specific gravity / relative density was the important part. Because gold is more dense than lead it displaces less water. Put another way 1lb of gold is smaller than 1lb of lead, that additional volume of lead also displaces water which contributes to its buoyancy and makes it
There might be a small misunderstanding here of buoyancy and weight....

You're probably right... let me think this out more...

Gold density is 19.3 g / cm^3 - Lead is 11.3 g / cm^3

1 kg of gold displaces 51.8134715 milliliters - the buoyant force of that water means that the gold's apparent weight under freshwater is reduced by 51.6446g - so it's apparent weight is 0.9483554 kg under water (how much it makes you sink minus the buoyant force it produces)

1kg of lead displaces 88.1678716 milliliters - the buoyant force of that water means the lead's apparent weight under water is 87.903368 grams - so the apparent weight of the 1kg of lead is 0.912096632 kilograms under water (how much it makes you sink minus the buoyant force)

soo.... THAT ratio is the important one, it would seem.

0.912 / 0.948 = 0.96176668788 lead to gold ratio... so if I used 20lbs of lead I'd need 19.23 lbs of gold that would cost around $517,200

Is it worth $517,200 to shave off about 3/4 of a pound? I'll think about it - but I'm leaning towards "maybe"
 

hilljo88

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
604
Reaction score
469
Location
nyc
# of dives
500 - 999
Seems like gold would have an even bigger advantage over Bitcoin in this application.
 

flyboy08

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
3,973
Reaction score
2,911
Location
NYC
# of dives
500 - 999
Try Bitcoin!
 

-JD-

Eclecticist
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
1,131
Reaction score
811
Location
Greater Philadelphia, PA
# of dives
50 - 99
Tungsten: 19.25 grams / cm^3, so close-enough to gold

5lb., 2" Tungsten cube weight w/ free 1" 10oz., trim weight only $299: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012YE3MC2

So, all you need for < $1200 with free prime shipping! :cool:

I don't want to be greedy, so you only need to pay me $500K. Use the 16K balance for a nice trip for yourself. - PM me for my mailing address. :D
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Top Bottom