Would Time Dilation slow down Cognition (ala Twins Paradox)?

[vanschen]

---

dili gyud maprove.. pero one way of imagining it, kay if for example you are moving close to the speed of light. (hypothetically), para nimo pareho ra gihapon ang passage of time.. dili ka makanotice sa changes due to time dilation kay tanan sa imong surroundings nga kuyog nimo kay subject man pud to time dilation... diha raka makabalo nga nihinay diay ang passage of time kung mubalik ka sa imong point of reference.. hehe!

pro wat of consciousness nga dli man kaha ma apektahan sa time? ang cognition ma apektahan pro consciousness? like those shamans/mystics who have altered their states of consiousness thru hallucinogenic drugs or meditation. the experience is inside not from the observation of the outside.

[fritzd]

pro wat of consciousness nga dli man kaha ma apektahan sa time? ang cognition ma apektahan pro consciousness? like those shamans/mystics who have altered their states of consiousness thru hallucinogenic drugs or meditation. the experience is inside not from the observation of the outside.

wala nako kabaw ana.. hehehe! like what simoncpu said, anything that obeys the laws of physics are affected by time dilation. The mere idea of consciousness involves processing or electronic signals in our brain which is also governed by physics. Murag padulong na ta ani to psychology. But anyway, like I said, time dilation has no exemptions. hehehe

slightly OT:One interesting fact though, did you know that all navigational systems from satellites, radars, planes, ships, etc... are all compensated for time dilation effects due to Einstein's General Relativity? hehe! It may seem absurb, but the location of communication/navigation satellites orbiting our planet are already affected by General Relativity even those astronauts orbiting our planet in the international space station. In order to give a very very accurate reading on a position of anything on our planet, they must also compensate for time dilation effects. Neglecting the effect would yield errors in the order meters. It might seem small in navigation it keeps everything safe. hehehe

of course laymen including me will always think that 99.999% speed of light will always be equal to the speed of light. technically theyre different but we can only use this technicality when calculating or when one tries to know the accurate details. the thing is the point was of the topic not the details of the speed of light whether its off by .1% or .0000000001%. if its understandable ok nana.

fritz:

naa koy nahunahunaan tubag sa ako ngutana sa last question. kng gamiton nmo ang concept ni brian greene sa book elegant universe nga space share some percentage of time when in motion. like if
space = 90% the motion of time would be 10% or space = 50% , t = 50% and so on. so ang time dilation ma explain thru this concept. pro to achieve the greatest motion in space is to travel straight. krn pra ma shield ang observer sa time dilation effects what if we use the extra dimensions. what if we let the strings travel throught the extra dimensions in a zigzag or in a spiral and maybe loop inside it. since ni travel not in a straight line [which is when motion in space becomes 99%] ang strings, den more motion is shared thru time. more dimensions mean more space pro dli ma visualize kng lapas 6 dimensions. meaning ma lessen or maybe nullify ang effect sa time dilation. kng ang strings are 18 orders of magnitude sa size sa electron so naa lng cguroy gamay nga movement. just my guess. what if usa ni sa way sa anti-time dilation pro i think dli pa mahimo theory ky matod sa book mentioned above dapat maka baw ta sa exact shape and size sa extra dimensions ky ni involve naman extra dimensions to work out the mathematical details. pro kng masulbad man kaha nila witten or greene [not necessarily sa idea above], i think we would need more engineers than Einsteins. and ang motion with non motion would be "non-motion" sa 3 dimensions with motion sa extra dimensions. hehe.

naa lng ko gusto ma clarify. kng i replace ang muons with light. infinite ba ang speed sa iyang frame of reference? ug wa nay point A point B? what if ur car travels at light speed ig on nmo sa suga dli ka kita sa suga ky preho naman mo ug speed?

Hehehe! we are getting way beyond our knowledge. hehehe! Bitaw, I don't really know. I can only answer firmly on things that I have gone through rigorously in terms of the mathematical framework. Frankly speaking, string theory really scares me. The equations I deal with in Quantum Theory are already very scary how much more for string theory. hehehe!

Regarding your comment about " i think we would need more engineers than Einsteins." I disagree. We all need both. In fact, when you are an engineer and you want to do research and breakthroughs in really state of the art technologies, you need to study highly advanced physics. This is in fact what is happening in the scientific community. Manny engineers turn into physicists and some physicists also become engineers. The truth is when it comes to highly advanced applied technology there is a very thin line dividing a Physicist and an Engineer. I have in fact a brilliant colleauge who is an engineer by trainig but is now doing research in fundamental physics because he finds it more interesting. To really achieve true innovations, one must really understand the fundamental principles and laws of the problem in order that one can engineer a state of the art object. hehehe! There are also people called applied scientists who are both physicists and engineers. And I guess this is what you really can those people doing breakthroughs in highly advanced technological applications.

About your last question, you can't repace muons with light. As Einstein said, the only true frame of reference in the universe is light. Why? Because its speed in vacuum is constant anywhere, wherever. It can also be confusing at times when you apply this to practical astrophysics problems but it has never been proven wrong ever since. like what sir rodsky said, we can never approach the speed of light. Only subatomic particles can do this. So we will never really know how we will view light if we were on a supercar. hehe But from what remembered, at relativistic speeds, our only true frame of reference in our own moving frame so we really can not view anything else outside.

[vanschen]

wala nako kabaw ana.. hehehe! like what simoncpu said, anything that obeys the laws of physics are affected by time dilation. The mere idea of consciousness involves processing or electronic signals in our brain which is also governed by physics. Murag padulong na ta ani to psychology. But anyway, like I said, time dilation has no exemptions. hehehe

slightly OT:One interesting fact though, did you know that all navigational systems from satellites, radars, planes, ships, etc... are all compensated for time dilation effects due to Einstein's General Relativity? hehe! It may seem absurb, but the location of communication/navigation satellites orbiting our planet are already affected by General Relativity even those astronauts orbiting our planet in the international space station. In order to give a very very accurate reading on a position of anything on our planet, they must also compensate for time dilation effects. Neglecting the effect would yield errors in the order meters. It might seem small in navigation it keeps everything safe. hehehe




Hehehe! we are getting way beyond our knowledge. hehehe! Bitaw, I don't really know. I can only answer firmly on things that I have gone through rigorously in terms of the mathematical framework. Frankly speaking, string theory really scares me. The equations I deal with in Quantum Theory are already very scary how much more for string theory. hehehe!

Regarding your comment about " i think we would need more engineers than Einsteins." I disagree. We all need both. In fact, when you are an engineer and you want to do research and breakthroughs in really state of the art technologies, you need to study highly advanced physics. This is in fact what is happening in the scientific community. Manny engineers turn into physicists and some physicists also become engineers. The truth is when it comes to highly advanced applied technology there is a very thin line dividing a Physicist and an Engineer. I have in fact a brilliant colleauge who is an engineer by trainig but is now doing research in fundamental physics because he finds it more interesting. To really achieve true innovations, one must really understand the fundamental principles and laws of the problem in order that one can engineer a state of the art object. hehehe! There are also people called applied scientists who are both physicists and engineers. And I guess this is what you really can those people doing breakthroughs in highly advanced technological applications.

About your last question, you can't repace muons with light. As Einstein said, the only true frame of reference in the universe is light. Why? Because its speed in vacuum is constant anywhere, wherever. It can also be confusing at times when you apply this to practical astrophysics problems but it has never been proven wrong ever since. like what sir rodsky said, we can never approach the speed of light. Only subatomic particles can do this. So we will never really know how we will view light if we were on a supercar. hehe But from what remembered, at relativistic speeds, our only true frame of reference in our own moving frame so we really can not view anything else outside.

mao ky consciousness is the area of psychology and the like which physics hasnt touched yet with the exception of psychophysics which is more on measurement man guro.

everything has exemptions. [including this statement!]

i think aware ko anang satellites. i think due to gravity than "acceleration" nearing speed of light ang cause sa time dilation. ayaw lng apili mathematics. hehehe.

yeah Mr. E was an engineer by profession before becoming a physicist.

but i wont agree with the fact nga nothing can approach or equal the speed of light. ako nabasahan ky ang relativity is considered krn as classical na theory. ang pasabot guro ani ky naa nay "nipuli" which is string theory and LQG. remember nga kaning duha gi fuse ang QM ug GR. so ma include ang faster than light phenomena or nonlocality sa QM with the 2 new theories. nya naa pa ang Newtons Bucket which relativity sort of "breaksdown." if i got it right naay assymetry ang two frames of reference. plus ang visible matter comprises only of 5% sa entire universe. wla pata kabaw nga naa pay particle much faster than light pro naa naman gani hypothetical particle called the tachyon which i know u are aware of. mora ang foundation sa special relativity including the energy-mass relation is light. wla pa gi include ang dark matter ug dark energy nga maoy mas dghan sa universe. plus naa pay extra dimensions. plus kng common sense lng ang basihan space is vast enough nga we would need faster than light travel pra maka reach sa destination within a fraction of a lifetime. analogous to airplanes mka enjoy ta sa earth wyl not spending/wasting time on travel. imaginon nmo galleons pata rn. and naa pa gyud kng maka himo nata space ships [USS Enterprise] @ light speed unsaon pag navigate kng wla tay radar-like tech bcn mabanga rata ug asteriod. mao ng mka ingon ko nga dli 100% absolutely certainly sure nga wlay maka equal or maka lapas nga object sa light speed.

kng gi yano ra nmo sabot tong link na equations [muons] which i dont understand and u think challenging ang mathematics sa QM unsa na lng kaha diay ang string theory samot pa ang tinuod nga equations ky gi simplify dba using mirror symmetry. toink. maka ingon man sad cguro kog a la Einstein: "The most incomprehensible thing is not that its comprehensible but because string theory is unimaginably difficult."

[Thank god there is Witten.]

[simoncpu]

plus kng common sense lng ang basihan space is vast enough nga we would need faster than light travel pra maka reach sa destination within a fraction of a lifetime. analogous to airplanes mka enjoy ta sa earth wyl not spending/wasting time on travel. imaginon nmo galleons pata rn. and naa pa gyud kng maka himo nata space ships [USS Enterprise] @ light speed unsaon pag navigate kng wla tay radar-like tech bcn mabanga rata ug asteriod. mao ng mka ingon ko nga dli 100% absolutely certainly sure nga wlay maka equal or maka lapas nga object sa light speed.

Hi vanschen,

Your reasoning goes like this: International travel and tourism is possible because of airplanes; therefore, FTL is possible because of airplanes.

I understand your point, but your statements just don't logically connect.

BTW, Star Trek never claimed that starships can travel faster than light. The USS Enterprise is able to travel vast distances in a short amount of time by warping the space around it. The vessel often remains stationary relative to the bubble inside it.

[ simon.cpu ]

[fritzd]

mao ky consciousness is the area of psychology and the like which physics hasnt touched yet with the exception of psychophysics which is more on measurement man guro.

everything has exemptions. [including this statement!]

i think aware ko anang satellites. i think due to gravity than "acceleration" nearing speed of light ang cause sa time dilation. ayaw lng apili mathematics. hehehe.

yeah Mr. E was an engineer by profession before becoming a physicist.

but i wont agree with the fact nga nothing can approach or equal the speed of light. ako nabasahan ky ang relativity is considered krn as classical na theory. ang pasabot guro ani ky naa nay "nipuli" which is string theory and LQG. remember nga kaning duha gi fuse ang QM ug GR. so ma include ang faster than light phenomena or nonlocality sa QM with the 2 new theories. nya naa pa ang Newtons Bucket which relativity sort of "breaksdown." if i got it right naay assymetry ang two frames of reference. plus ang visible matter comprises only of 5% sa entire universe. wla pata kabaw nga naa pay particle much faster than light pro naa naman gani hypothetical particle called the tachyon which i know u are aware of. mora ang foundation sa special relativity including the energy-mass relation is light. wla pa gi include ang dark matter ug dark energy nga maoy mas dghan sa universe. plus naa pay extra dimensions. plus kng common sense lng ang basihan space is vast enough nga we would need faster than light travel pra maka reach sa destination within a fraction of a lifetime. analogous to airplanes mka enjoy ta sa earth wyl not spending/wasting time on travel. imaginon nmo galleons pata rn. and naa pa gyud kng maka himo nata space ships [USS Enterprise] @ light speed unsaon pag navigate kng wla tay radar-like tech bcn mabanga rata ug asteriod. mao ng mka ingon ko nga dli 100% absolutely certainly sure nga wlay maka equal or maka lapas nga object sa light speed.

kng gi yano ra nmo sabot tong link na equations [muons] which i dont understand and u think challenging ang mathematics sa QM unsa na lng kaha diay ang string theory samot pa ang tinuod nga equations ky gi simplify dba using mirror symmetry. toink. maka ingon man sad cguro kog a la Einstein: "The most incomprehensible thing is not that its comprehensible but because string theory is unimaginably difficult."

[Thank god there is Witten.]

as of now, nothing can approach the speed of light kay so far all the physics that have been proven true by experiments justifies this. sakto imong gi-ingon about string theory and stuff nga basin pwede mu-approach sa speed of light. But as of now, that is all theory. It will remain a theory until proven true. As of now there are still so many things unanswered in physics that string theory is ignoring like high temperature superconductivity, quantum computers, nanotechnology,etc... And only the proven theories like quantum theory, special and general relativity and also relativistic quantum field theory yield tangible results. And according to those theories, large objects like humans can not approach the speed of light. If ever we can, our atomic ang molecular structure would lose its stability and we will collapse into our subatomic components. hehehe!

Its very also very misleading to try to create your own discoveries and coclusions or original ideas by simply reading these overly simplified stuff about string theory. Kay you can't imagine all abstract abstract mathatical formulations that materialized into these concepts you will read about string theory. Like Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in QM, it actually has a general commutation (math stuff, hahaha) relation in math that if both quantities (eg. position and momentum) do not commute, then you can not measure both accurately. It took me awhile to really grasp the meaning of that. Before I got to my level, I would also try to make my own assumptions and conclusions about really advanced stuff like string theory, time warping, etc... When I was in my 1st year in my BSc Applied Physics, I was so eager to learn about quarks, particle physics and stuff that I asked our instructor when I would be able to learn about those. She just laughed. To deal with those things, you need to go through a lot of stuff. I mean really really a lot of stuff. hehehe! Most string theory documentaries and books, are mostly oversimplified to the point the an ordinary reader's imagination will be sparked to infinity. hehe!

Anyway, I was in my thesis supervisor's office recently. He's a full breed theoretical physicist. I saw two string theory books in his office. I thought at first he didn't care about string theory because his specialization is in Quantum optics and Condensed matter physics. This means that string theory is really making an impact to the theoretica physicists around the world even to the ones who are not exactly doing research in string theory. hehehe!!

[vanschen]

Hi vanschen,

Your reasoning goes like this: International travel and tourism is possible because of airplanes; therefore, FTL is possible because of airplanes.

I understand your point, but your statements just don't logically connect.

BTW, Star Trek never claimed that starships can travel faster than light. The USS Enterprise is able to travel vast distances in a short amount of time by warping the space around it. The vessel often remains stationary relative to the bubble inside it.

[ simon.cpu ]

i never said anything about international travel and tourism. or maybe this is just as a derogatory remark. what im trying to say is that airplanes are important because theyre much faster than ships since the earth is a big place to travel. remember necessity is the mother of all invention. though I THINK when the first airplane was made their goal was just to have sustained flight or to prove that flight was possible. speed was because of technological development.

imagine nga nagpuyo ka ug remote place and you want to go to the city. of course you would need a car so youd arrive at the city quicker. you may walk or ride a horse but the car is quicker. time wouldnt be wasted with the same distance travelled. that is the point of the analogy.

with the car city analogy, the difference only with space is that we dont have a city to go to. we only know that it is big and far and to reach it we would need something faster. if you will, a spaceship that is faster than light is a requirement if we ever are going to reach there in an "appropriate time."

i was referring to the matter-antimatter drive/propulsion. remember the ship stretch at the start of the program? if it were the warp drive, youd see space or starlight warp when it speeds up. but im not saying wlay warp drive.

[simoncpu]

@vanschen: You are someone that has a rich and vivid imagination. You live in a world of possibilities and not content with what's currently is. You find the unknown fascinating, so you are drawn towards magic and things that are paranormal. You have a strong tendency to be an emo.

As you can see, I understand your point. Your statements just don't logically connect.

[vanschen]

as of now, nothing can approach the speed of light kay so far all the physics that have been proven true by experiments justifies this. sakto imong gi-ingon about string theory and stuff nga basin pwede mu-approach sa speed of light. But as of now, that is all theory. It will remain a theory until proven true. As of now there are still so many things unanswered in physics that string theory is ignoring like high temperature superconductivity, quantum computers, nanotechnology,etc... And only the proven theories like quantum theory, special and general relativity and also relativistic quantum field theory yield tangible results. And according to those theories, large objects like humans can not approach the speed of light. If ever we can, our atomic ang molecular structure would lose its stability and we will collapse into our subatomic components. hehehe!

Its very also very misleading to try to create your own discoveries and coclusions or original ideas by simply reading these overly simplified stuff about string theory. Kay you can't imagine all abstract abstract mathatical formulations that materialized into these concepts you will read about string theory. Like Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in QM, it actually has a general commutation (math stuff, hahaha) relation in math that if both quantities (eg. position and momentum) do not commute, then you can not measure both accurately. It took me awhile to really grasp the meaning of that. Before I got to my level, I would also try to make my own assumptions and conclusions about really advanced stuff like string theory, time warping, etc... When I was in my 1st year in my BSc Applied Physics, I was so eager to learn about quarks, particle physics and stuff that I asked our instructor when I would be able to learn about those. She just laughed. To deal with those things, you need to go through a lot of stuff. I mean really really a lot of stuff. hehehe! Most string theory documentaries and books, are mostly oversimplified to the point the an ordinary reader's imagination will be sparked to infinity. hehe!

Anyway, I was in my thesis supervisor's office recently. He's a full breed theoretical physicist. I saw two string theory books in his office. I thought at first he didn't care about string theory because his specialization is in Quantum optics and Condensed matter physics. This means that string theory is really making an impact to the theoretica physicists around the world even to the ones who are not exactly doing research in string theory. hehehe!!

just to clarify i am not trying to create my own discoveries and conclusions technically speaking. possibly ang ideas. but misleading? sa imong point of view of course. i know what counter intuitive means by heart. if that is what you are referring to. since most of the physics discoveries are "reality" shaking. and of course you will have a different view cause the area/field we are talking is your expertise. you surely have a better view than i have. but since we are talking of ideas. and an idea is a fusion between logic and imagination and is the product of creativity. remember nga Mr. E, when he thought of his theory he didnt limit his idea with what has been regarded as factual like the aether. it was moving beyond it that made his theory successful. although na prove na wlay aether but reluctant ang uban and still continue to find ways to disprove it ky they think naay something wrong sa experiment. the point is kng ni tuo lng cya sa unsay gi sulti sa physics community at that time wla guro or maybe delayed ang discovery sa iyang theory. ug ngano cya paman naka hunahuna nga kadaghan physicist at that time and to think nga 8 years old pa cya ato. so naay 18 years nga gap nga possible dli c Mr. E naka discover sa theory. but now we know that it was his idea when he was 16 yrs old that started it all. and you mentioned that popular physics books spark the ordinary minds to infinity, i think that is the whole point!! usa sa purpose sa book is to have a fresh look at the theories. not to be stuck with what is the dogma [if i may use the term]. creativity is Moving Beyond not going against. and kng history ang basihan, Mr. E was bored when he was still an undergrad because the newer/current ideas wasnt taught. its like he was learning the same lessons that everybody knew of. nothing new nothing special. kng krn pa natao c Mr E unsa kaha ang iya theory nahimo now that naa nay inet.

since you stated nga because you have learned higher mathematics you now have a deeper understanding of the uncertainty principle or have fully grasped the meaning of the UP. may i ask what this difference is? how could a layman's conception of the UP be different to a physicist point of view?

maybe he was trying to create a world of his own.

[fritzd]

just to clarify i am not trying to create my own discoveries and conclusions technically speaking. possibly ang ideas. but misleading? sa imong point of view of course. i know what counter intuitive means by heart. if that is what you are referring to. since most of the physics discoveries are "reality" shaking. and of course you will have a different view cause the area/field we are talking is your expertise. you surely have a better view than i have. but since we are talking of ideas. and an idea is a fusion between logic and imagination and is the product of creativity. remember nga Mr. E, when he thought of his theory he didnt limit his idea with what has been regarded as factual like the aether. it was moving beyond it that made his theory successful. although na prove na wlay aether but reluctant ang uban and still continue to find ways to disprove it ky they think naay something wrong sa experiment. the point is kng ni tuo lng cya sa unsay gi sulti sa physics community at that time wla guro or maybe delayed ang discovery sa iyang theory. ug ngano cya paman naka hunahuna nga kadaghan physicist at that time and to think nga 8 years old pa cya ato. so naay 18 years nga gap nga possible dli c Mr. E naka discover sa theory. but now we know that it was his idea when he was 16 yrs old that started it all. and you mentioned that popular physics books spark the ordinary minds to infinity, i think that is the whole point!! usa sa purpose sa book is to have a fresh look at the theories. not to be stuck with what is the dogma [if i may use the term]. creativity is Moving Beyond not going against. and kng history ang basihan, Mr. E was bored when he was still an undergrad because the newer/current ideas wasnt taught. its like he was learning the same lessons that everybody knew of. nothing new nothing special. kng krn pa natao c Mr E unsa kaha ang iya theory nahimo now that naa nay inet.

Hey! With all due respect, I am not trying to undermine anything. My point is general which is seen in many many people. hehe! The point I am driving at is scientific attitude. I always look for references for assumptions or explanations given by other people in this case you. You just can't thoroughly stand on a judgement like as if you are trained to do so. In short, we should also behave according to what we truly know. I don't know a lot about string theory. In fact, you probably know more concept that I do. And I don't want to bother myself with string theory as of now because I'm not there yet. But I guess you are right. We are just having fun. hehehe! Imagining... Thinking of wild possibilities. Time dilation.... My main argument was just about theories that provide tangible results. that's all... String theory has not been proven yet. So like I said, we will never really know about approaching the speed of light. All the things minus string theory suggest that it isn't possible.

since you stated nga because you have learned higher mathematics you now have a deeper understanding of the uncertainty principle or have fully grasped the meaning of the UP. may i ask what this difference is? how could a layman's conception of the UP be different to a physicist point of view?

maybe he was trying to create a world of his own.

I have to admit I'm still struggling with what I am doing right now. hehe It's really a shame. Anyway, what I mean is that, I can derive and explain uncertainty principle for other quantum observables. Like for example, in Quantum Optics, the amplitude and phase of an electromagnetic field have the same uncertainly analogous to position and momentum. But this still even baffles me up to this point, I still kneel to professors. hehe

I don't mean any disrespect to you. In fact, I really admire your enthusiasm on the subject matter that is why I always try to share what I know. And I don't say anything about what I don't know or don't understand very well. Just be careful about bold statements and conclusions because we are not string theory experts here. I could also be wrong with what all the things I said. hahaha! I'm also here to learn. Let's all try to have a scientific attitude. If possible, let's post references to our ideas. In the scientific world, you can be persecuted like hell for not citing references for your statements. I've been through this before and now. I behave to much like a scientist. And we are all not scientists here. sorry for that. hehe! peace!

Mainstream science can sometimes be also over hyped. Like the term singularity, it always gave a mysterious essence to it. But when you really learn about it, professors just use it as a tool and give no spotlight to it. I was ecstatic when my teachers explain simply about singularities. They were just like, "what's wrong with you? It's just mathematics." hahaha! It may be possible to travel to the speed of light in the future. Who knows, year years years years ago they said that colored cellphones are impossible. hehehehe! When you are a scientist, your imagination is limited to the physical laws constraining your imagination. And eventually theses imaginations eventually expand to practical objects that we use everyday. Unfortunately, we are in no position to make imaginations that can make breakthroughs. But who knows.. hehehehe

One thing is for sure, string theory if proven, will be the greatest triumph of mankind in history. Or it could just turn out to be a misunderstanding. hahaha My own personal opinion is as follows. Everytime, we discover something know like a a new theory to explain something, some other problem always comes out. When Schrodinger formulated QM, he said to his students that they should find new problems to solve like in biology because he thought that physics has been solved. All of it. It turns out that everytime something new is discovered a new problem always arises that needs further research. What I believe is that if string theory is ever confirmed, soon enough it will also lead to new problems and questions the are yet to be answered. hehehe Science rules! hehe

[vanschen]

@vanschen: You are someone that has a rich and vivid imagination. You live in a world of possibilities and not content with what's currently is. You find the unknown fascinating, so you are drawn towards magic and things that are paranormal. You have a strong tendency to be an emo.

As you can see, I understand your point. Your statements just don't logically connect.

hahahaha.

blah blah blah blah.

psychologer.

rocker ko bai!!