Ahh, keep talking long enough and it's obvious you don't know what your talking about.

We can easily do 20g on earth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-G_training

1g is much easier in mars gravity as you can simply tilt the chamber at an angle while spinning it. Training centrifuges generally have the chamber on a hinge so you automatically get the correct angle.

Now, sure you lose some energy to friction. But, not all that much further, we have a lot of experience dealing with very heavy rotating objects for decades. EX: Power plants.

A small centrifuge is not a viable place to have an entire colony to live in. Sure, you can stick someone in a high-g centrifuge by himself for a little while, but I'm talking about a habitat that people live indefinitely. Equating the two clearly shows you don't know what you're talking about.

> having a major engineering challenge due to the existing gravity?

Rotating a habitat is a hard problem in space or on a planet. But, Mars's is gravity would make the problem easier not harder. The atmosphere might be a problem, scale might be a problem etc etc, but gravity is not. Further, there may be little need for 24/7 1g, perhaps a tiny room to work out in is enough, perhaps you should sleep in 1g or perhaps 1/3 is enough for sleep etc.

But, again gravity is not the problem. And yes such a massive fundamental failure in understanding is a clear sign of incompetence.

Rotating something that size in Mars' gravity is far more difficult that rotating something in space. Clearly, you're far less competent than you think you are.

We literally already rotate large structures for amusement.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolving_restaurant...

To be fair, they intentionally rotate slow enough as to have no perceivable g forces.

The example on that list that I had been to most recently is the Westin in Atlanta.

It's 57M in diameter and it's upper floor spins at once every 30 minutes. Plugging that into Mω²r, you end up with 0.0000354084g.

Not exactly the best example.