• Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It would be close but but exactly the same. A vacuum would refract the light going through it differently than a bubble of gas. Though I think it would need to be pretty big to see it with the naked eye.

        • Kühe sind toll@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You see the a bubble of gas(and therefore the absence of water), not the oxygen itself. You could use only nitrogen gas and you couldn’t tell the difference.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There won’t be that much CO2 for a long time, even if we increase our carbon output. Currently it stands at around 0.04%, third to argon at a bit under 1%. Oxygen is just under 21%. Oxygen and nitrogen together make up over 99% of the atmosphere (at sea level). That’s for dry air, otherwise water vapour is at around 1% and the others reduced to fit that in.

    • Goblin_Mode@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well if we’re gonna get specific then if your blowing the bubbles I would assume it’s largely carbon dioxide lol