4 ms·

How long would you have to run the centrifuge for? If it were 6-7 times faster, you would have to run a machine nonstop for 10 years. Seems like a tremendous

How long would you have to run the centrifuge for? If it were 6-7 times faster, you would have to run a machine nonstop for 10 years. Seems like a tremendous waste of energy, heat from a motor which could affect the results, and a great likelihood of experimental equipment failure.

robomartin 13y ago
No, you could go a million times faster. A million! Here's an interesting resource: http://www.endmemo.com/bio/grpm.php http://www.endmemo.com/bio/grpm.php Now, there might be reasons why a million g's might be a bad idea. Maybe 100K g's is a better choice. Someone with more expertise in centrifuge application could chip in and clarify this.
- jerf 13y ago
  I'm not sure it would be valid. At a million g's, I'm a liquid. But most people would broadly speaking classify me as a solid (albeit one containing a lot of liquid).
  - robomartin 13y ago
    > At a million g's, I'm a liquid Not really. You'll disintegrate in strange ways based on the relative density of your constituent parts. <edit>: Another thought is that if you laid on a bed for 13 years (the time it took for a drop of pitch to form) without moving --ignoring tissue decay and other factors-- you'd probably "flow" just as you might in a high gravity environment. Gravity, like rust, never sleeps. </edit> Yet, unless a domain expert says otherwise, I think your point is absolutely valid. However, pitch might just be the kind of substance that would be fine at a million g's. I don't know. That's the reason for my request for comment from someone with centrifuge experience. At a million g's a lot of seemingly strange things can happen. However, perhaps 100, 1000 or 10,000 g's is reasonable. I used the million g example as an illustration of the attainable extreme in response to a comment that spoke about 6 or 7 g's. Clearly we can do better, far better. In consultation with a domain expert (Chemist?) I would design the experiment to give results in somewhere between a day and a month. Faster if possible. The criteria would be to choose an acceleration that does not fundamentally change the nature of the substance under test. All we want to do is promote faster flow.
    - jerf 13y ago
      I was admittedly being glib; obviously bone has different characteristics than fat. But characteristics can definitely unhappily change and I'd want an expert involved too.
      - robomartin 13y ago
        Well, it looks like we have at least one Chemist pitching in (no pun intended). Time to learn a thing or two. Chemistry is one of those things I wish I had devote more time to in school. Lot's of physics and math but never dove deep into chemistry beyond what was absolutely required.

robomartin 13y ago

No, you could go a million times faster. A million! Here's an interesting resource: http://www.endmemo.com/bio/grpm.php http://www.endmemo.com/bio/grpm.php Now, there might be reasons why a million g's might be a bad idea. Maybe 100K g's is a better choice. Someone with more expertise in centrifuge application could chip in and clarify this.

jerf 13y ago
I'm not sure it would be valid. At a million g's, I'm a liquid. But most people would broadly speaking classify me as a solid (albeit one containing a lot of liquid).
- robomartin 13y ago
  > At a million g's, I'm a liquid Not really. You'll disintegrate in strange ways based on the relative density of your constituent parts. <edit>: Another thought is that if you laid on a bed for 13 years (the time it took for a drop of pitch to form) without moving --ignoring tissue decay and other factors-- you'd probably "flow" just as you might in a high gravity environment. Gravity, like rust, never sleeps. </edit> Yet, unless a domain expert says otherwise, I think your point is absolutely valid. However, pitch might just be the kind of substance that would be fine at a million g's. I don't know. That's the reason for my request for comment from someone with centrifuge experience. At a million g's a lot of seemingly strange things can happen. However, perhaps 100, 1000 or 10,000 g's is reasonable. I used the million g example as an illustration of the attainable extreme in response to a comment that spoke about 6 or 7 g's. Clearly we can do better, far better. In consultation with a domain expert (Chemist?) I would design the experiment to give results in somewhere between a day and a month. Faster if possible. The criteria would be to choose an acceleration that does not fundamentally change the nature of the substance under test. All we want to do is promote faster flow.
  - jerf 13y ago
    I was admittedly being glib; obviously bone has different characteristics than fat. But characteristics can definitely unhappily change and I'd want an expert involved too.
    - robomartin 13y ago
      Well, it looks like we have at least one Chemist pitching in (no pun intended). Time to learn a thing or two. Chemistry is one of those things I wish I had devote more time to in school. Lot's of physics and math but never dove deep into chemistry beyond what was absolutely required.