this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
27 points (93.5% liked)

Science

5930 readers
49 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Skanky@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Did a little research on this thing. Its capacity is 1900 g-tons, meaning that it can take a payload of 1000 kg (one metric ton) and spin it to apply 1900 G's.

Is 1 ton it's weight limit? Dunno.

Is it limited to 1900 G? Dunno.

The "compressing space time" statement is just poor journalism. They're referring to the fact that they can perform accelerated testing because of the higher limits. Basically, a test might take 2 days instead of 10 because it can go harder. Yes, it's that stupid.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

You da real MVP.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Is 1 ton it’s weight limit? Dunno.

Its weight limit is 19 MN. You can divide it in any reasonable product of payload mass and apparent gravity you want.

It would be way more practical to label it by the actual weight than that gravity*mass bullshit. But engineering has some boneheaded practices that people insist on keeping alive, mostly for gatekeeping.

[–] Skanky@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Its weight limit is 19 MN. You can divide it in any reasonable product of payload mass and apparent gravity you want.

Doubt

You're assuming that it has the ability to spin faster at lower loading. There's certainly an upper limit to how fast it can go (because of motor limits, gearing, etc).

In reality, the limits for this machine are probably best described by a payload vs. speed chart.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You can always move the payload away from the centrifuge, you don't have to spin any slower or faster.

The maximum apparent gravity is still fixed, but it's a direct consequence of the materials available so there's some industry standard chart somewhere where you can put those 1900 g-ton and read how many gs you can get.

[–] Skanky@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Pretty sure that's not practical in this case. Theoretically? Sure.

[–] Kratzkopf@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

For some reason the 'article' mentions compressing space and time multiple times. Does it really though? Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I can't imagine large centrifugal forces inducing any relativistic effects.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Only if it goes at a statistically significant % of the speed of light, I think. Artificial "gravity" it creates should not have any relativistic effects, AFAIK. These only show up at proximity to large masses (real gravity).

[–] 7toed@midwest.social 3 points 1 week ago

And even 1900x Earth masses would have a time interval of 0.9999986774:1

[–] BigDickEnergy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"Hypergravity" centrifuge? Isn't that just a centrifuge? Are there any hypogravity centrifuges?

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 4 points 1 week ago

Let's define hyper gravity first...I have no idea what that could even mean