hey /sci/ I need help with an idea. 1) How do you measure

>>8311745
It would spread out, right? Why would it contract? The gas giants actually bulge out at the equator, right?

>>8311745
i wouldn't collapse in on itself ever. spinning causes perceived outward forces as the molecular bonds attempt to change the direction of a moving object. when the forces of attraction are no longer strong enough, the orb will scatter outward tangential to its location on the sphere in the direction of rotation.

Even some rocky planets have a slight bulge at their equators do to this effect. It will not collapse.

>>8311746
>>8311785
>>8311795
But isn't that because a planet isn't solid all the way through? Or even a star?

Does this mean the only way I could get a reaction like this would be to surround the orb with a strong magnetic field?

>>8311810
I guess no one has an answer.

I'm trying to figure this out because I want to know what I would need to know in order to display this in a program.

>>8311915
Everyone has the answer here.
It would not collapse, it makes no sense for it to collapse at all. If it spins there are forces applied from it's center outwards, strongest at the surface. If anything, at a certain speed it would shatter. The liquid one would do that even sooner.

>>8312390
I'm not disputing their answers. But I still need to know, how would you create the conditions in which it would collapse in on itself. How would you keep an orb spinning faster and faster without it pushing outwards and instead push inwards?

Is a strong magnetic field the only thing that would do that?

Start with an orb so massive that it begins to contract into a black hole by itself. As it starts to contract it will rotate faster, therefore fulfilling your conditions.

>>8312593
There are only 4 forces in the universe: gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force. The weak nuclear force is an opposition force (in the simplest sense) so that would be useless. Therefore any of the other three forces could theoretically be used to collapse a ball in on itself. I believe out of the three the strong nuclear force is much much stronger than the other two, but it only works on atomic scales. I suppose if you spun your ball so fast it became a quark plasma this effect could be taken advantage of, but good luck getting a program to figure that shit out.

Centripetal force wont cause a spinning, solid object to "collapse into itself"

>>8312593
Yeah, no, The speed of rotation has literally nothing to do with collapsing. For an object to collaps in on it's self it has to become so massive that it collapses under it's own weight. That happens at the Swartzchild radius. You spinning the ball could actually, hypotheticaly, increase this threshold and keep it together for longer.

take a bucket, attach a string to it, fill it with water and start spinning it any direction you want. The water is going to stay in the bucket because the spin is "pushing" it outwards. That's what spin does to your metal ball. Depending on the material and it's plastic deformation threshold it would first deform and then shatter, just shatter or stretch out really far (which would also slow down the rotation by a lot).

Your problem has no real world solution, centripetal force will ALWAYS push outwards. your only choices are >>8312622
and that would either require a lot of energy or a lot of compressed mass to happen

>>8312622
>>8312644
>>8312666
Thanks guys. That info will help me get towards what I'm looking for.

Also, two dubs and a trips. I don't know what that means but it feels good.