Richard Hachel wrote:

> Le 16/08/2023 à 01:19, JanPB a écrit :
>> They don't apply here because the disc's material points are not free:
>> they are constrained by the constitutive equations describing the
>> behaviour of the material the disc is made of. -- Jan
>
> It is necessary to place oneself ideally in the case of a hyper-rigid
> and indeformable disc.

that's the point. The assumption is made for a rigid disk, itself will not
survive. The max speed of any point of the disk cannot exceed c. Hence the
middle will max go to c/2, etc. Better you two make ready be conscripted
to fight the war in ukurina for the gay actor khazar goy Smellensky. This
is what your nazi stupid regime of a gov says. "𝗪𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝗺𝗽 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲
𝗸𝗵𝗮𝘇𝗮𝗿 𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗹𝘆" so he can siphon in peace. Fuck you both. Now go
suck dick on each other.

Le 16/08/2023 à 14:17, Faunce Belman a écrit :

> The max speed of any point of the disk cannot exceed c.

Vous avez découvert ça tout seul?

R.H.

Richard Hachel wrote:

> Le 16/08/2023 à 14:17, Faunce Belman a écrit :
>> The max speed of any point of the disk cannot exceed c.
>
> Vous avez découvert ça tout seul?

this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max speed
at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 being destroyed?? Or,
are you letting it go spiralling??

'𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' -
𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/

the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me the
fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go fighting to death
for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲?? How stupid can you be?

Le 16/08/2023 à 14:36, Brain Baburin a écrit :
>
> this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max speed
> at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸
> being destroyed? ? Or,
> are you letting it go spiralling? ?
>
> '𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺
> 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁
> 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁
> 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' -
> 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
> https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/
>
> the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me the
> fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿
> 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go fighting to death
> for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲? ? How
> stupid can you be?

Nobody talks about spinning the disc in a "spiral".

Note that (I beg you to read very carefully what I write in order to avoid
major errors of misunderstanding) if we trace, on the disk
at rest a circumference at mid-radius, then that the disk is rotated, when
the periphery of the disk approaches c, the contraction of the external
part of the disk (cortical part in medical terms) has already long been
much greater than the contraction of the inner part of the disc (medullary
part).

I beg you to set R'=R.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²), and you will see that the outer
half-ray contracts more than the outer half-ray.

This is logical because Vo=V(tang) and V(tang) itself depends on the
radius.

You understand?

R.H.

Richard Hachel wrote:

>> this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max
>> speed at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 being
>> destroyed? ? Or, are you letting it go spiralling? ?
>> '𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺
>> 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' - 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
>> https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/
>>
>> the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me
>> the fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go fighting
>> to death for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲? ? How stupid can you
>> be?
>
> Nobody talks about spinning the disc in a "spiral".
>
> Note that (I beg you to read very carefully what I write in order to
> avoid major errors of misunderstanding) if we trace, on the disk at rest
> a circumference at mid-radius, then that the disk is rotated, when the
> periphery of the disk approaches c, the contraction of the external part
> of the disk (cortical part in medical terms) has already long been much
> greater than the contraction of the inner part of the disc (medullary
> part).

it doesn't matter the contraction. The disk will go spiralling. You guys
are idiots. Is it a rigid disk or not. This evil men don't undrestand
physics, domains and subdomains. That "Python" is a fool.

Le 16/08/2023 à 22:06, Titus Vikulov a écrit :

> "Python" is a fool.

Yes.

R.H.

Le 16/08/2023 à 22:06, Titus Vikulov a écrit :

> Is it a rigid disk or not.

It's not a question of rigidity or not.
Ideally, an absolutely non-deformable disk is taken.
It is admitted that it is made of such a material, so indeformable, so
rigid, that it will not deform by one millimeter.
And yet Dr. Hachel asserts that the disk will deform, and that a disk with
a radius of 5 meters will become a disk with a radius of 3 meters, if it
is rotated until a tangential speed of Vo=0.8c is obtained.
What you have to understand (PLEASE understand) is that it's not really
the disc that is deforming, but the spatial metric.
A bit like the vagon which measures twelve meters, only measures 7.2 in
the Galilean reference frames at this speed.
It's not that the car is shrinking, but space itself is contracting.
There, it's the same, but in rotating circles, the effect becomes
absolute.
The rotating disk space actually contracts, and the non-rotating disk sees
it contracted, and the contracted disk sees the disk at rest expanded
relative to it. The effect here is absolute.

R.H.

Richard Hachel wrote:

>> Is it a rigid disk or not.
>
> It's not a question of rigidity or not.
> Ideally, an absolutely non-deformable disk is taken.
> It is admitted that it is made of such a material, so indeformable, so
> rigid, that it will not deform by one millimeter.
> And yet Dr. Hachel asserts that the disk will deform, and that a disk
> with a radius of 5 meters will become a disk with a radius of 3 meters,
> if it is rotated until a tangential speed of Vo=0.8c is obtained.

hi my friend, nice to meet you. So the middle will go at 0.4c, which will
contract too. No spiralling, unless you think it exceeds. You are so cool.
I love you so much.

Le 16/08/2023 à 23:45, Stephan Lerner a écrit :
> Richard Hachel wrote:
>
>>> Is it a rigid disk or not.
>>
>> It's not a question of rigidity or not.
>> Ideally, an absolutely non-deformable disk is taken.
>> It is admitted that it is made of such a material, so indeformable, so
>> rigid, that it will not deform by one millimeter.
>> And yet Dr. Hachel asserts that the disk will deform, and that a disk
>> with a radius of 5 meters will become a disk with a radius of 3 meters,
>> if it is rotated until a tangential speed of Vo=0.8c is obtained.
>
> hi my friend, nice to meet you. So the middle will go at 0.4c, which will
> contract too. No spiralling, unless you think it exceeds. You are so cool.
> I love you so much.

Hi my friend.

It is important to clarify something.

We assume that the disk at rest has 5 meters of radius, and,
if you ask a competent relativist physicist (there must be some), he will
answer that if you spin the disk at Vo=0.8c of tangential speed, the
circumference of the disk will become 3 meters.

This is what excellent posters like Sylvia Else, Paul B.Andersen, Julien
Arlandis will say.

You are going to add, as you have just done here, that, if we take a
circumference at mid-radius of the revolving disc, the tangential speed
will be two times less. Let Vo=0.4c.

It's just as fair.

But we must add this: this contraction is not homogeneous, and the
external part of the disc (cortical part) contracts much more than the
medullary part (medullary part).

It's so logical that I wonder why I have to explain it.

Thus, if we draw a circumference at mid-radius on the disc at rest,
this circumference will no longer be at mid-radius, but no longer "inside"
when the disk turns.

The calculations are very simple, and anyone can do them.

R.H.