Demonslayer

Ok, thanks. I'll do a little more research and see if I understand the argument. I don't see anything metaphysical about it. If a particle's velocity today relative to "us" is directly correlated to "its" and "our" acceleration since the beginning of the universe (or since we last measured it), then acceleration must be the true "cause" of time dilation. Planes at different speeds have had different accelerations to reach that speed. I see how it is easier to use speed rather than acceleration to calculate time dilation, but it really boils down to the same thing.

It seems that the difference between gravitational force and gravitational potential was not explained very clearly when we were taught relativity theory. Still, every velocity difference in the universe must be caused by an acceleration, making acceleration the ultimate cause of any time-dilation. A velocity difference can never be created without accelerating one or both of the frames involved. So I still can't see how time-dilation can have two causes. But no one has really given me a satisfactory explanation about why they say mass is a hinder to achieving light speed when mass does not change within the frame of my own spaceship. I can not have kinetic energy relative to myself, so I am not using my kinetic energy to increase my kinetic energy. My fuel contains as much energy at rest as it does at 0.99 c since the energy is proportional to the mass of the fuel. Example 1. Has not been experimentally verified and does therefore not constitute evidence. Example 2. Each sample must be accelerated up to its rotational speed, this offsets the differences i G-forces. Do you have a link or something that describes this experiment?

I think the main problem with your "quest" is that you do not understand what a hallucination is. This is mostly due to the governments scare-tactics (seeing monsters and talking hot-dogs) and Hollywood's poor depiction of hallucinations. The only thing that I've seen that comes close is the scene from "Fear and loathing in Las Vegas" were the floor of the casino starts to flow with a ever-changing pattern. True hallucinations have no basis in the real world, they are constructed by your own mind and often seem extremely real, and therefore also scary. The classic psychedelics like LSD, peyote, cannabis and mushrooms usually only cause illusions or distortions of real sensory input. It is also very seldom the case that "hallucinations" are experienced without a profound change in how the world is perceived. (Closed-eye-visuals on shrooms are my favorites since they only bring forth what my mind produces.) Open-eye-visuals are nearly always only distortions of real sensory input. I have had visual "hallucinations" after smoking Yopo seeds (contains bufotenine (Is also found in toad skin)) and this gave no psychedelic "feel", and it was extremely boring (even though the intertwining circles of glowing beads are beautiful). The best part of hallucinogenics is the shift in consciousness. Every non-drug hallucination-inducing technique described in this thread is horrendously more risky than trying drugs. Meditation will only bring you as far as the alternative consciousness-part of tripping. Laughing gas is very safe, but it too is a sort of drug. But laughing gas is more of a dissociative drug than a hallucinogenic drug. Hallucinogens have their own small differences. LSD and psilocybin-mushrooms are essentially the same, though I feel the body-load of mushrooms add a real quality to the trip, while LSD feels too chemically "clean". Datura and related plants are too dangerous to play with, they last too long, and they have really uncomfortable side effects. Salvia is just TOO weird to do with any regularity. Hallucinations do not come in clear cut categories of visual, auditory, tactile or emotional. It is a symphony of experience that is a lovely thing if you use it correctly. A psychedelic experience is NOT entertainment, it is a trip within your own mind, and not everybody is ready to accept what they find in there. One salvia experience that was really disturbing involved many sorts of hallucinations together with a total shift in perception of reality. When you use psychedelics it often feels like you are awakening from a dream, this is especially true of salvia. I felt the usual sideways gravity (which is totally weird) and then was twisted round my axis by a sort of clinically cold tornado. Giant invisible razors cut me into 2-inch salami slices (a real tactile feeling, but not painful). I was then transferred onto a two-dimensional glass-tile wall, were every tile contained a full image of me. Lastly I felt as if I was the surface of a wall and was interrupting the five small gnomes that create reality. They were all upset that I was able to see what reality really was. One of them tried to convince the others that I should not be allowed to return to what we call reality, but the others were more laid back arguing that no-one would believe me anyway. The strange thing about this is that many people have this exact trip. There is a video on youtube called "salvia trip to hell" that accurately depicts this hallucination.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ2Q4GELpoo LSD, pot and mushrooms usually give a more gentle trip in which you usually are aware that it is only a trip. But you are really missing the point by thinking that a psychedelic trip is about the hallucinations. The things you are looking for can regretfully not be found without the use of "drugs". If there was such a technique it would certainly be illegal as well. Drugs aren't outlawed because they are dangerous, they are outlawed because they change your way of thinking. The reason why the government lies about drugs is that the truth is not very scary. The worst part about government "information" is that it is actually quite true and accurate when it comes to hard drugs like heroine, crack and meth, but no-one believes them anymore when their lies about weed and hallucinogens are exposed. I do agree with the person here that said that the nearest legal thing to a drug-induced hallucination is dreaming. In fact it is frighteningly similar to salvia. A full blown hallucinogenic experience is theoretically possible by training oneself to change ones own state of consciousness, but this clearly will take years of practice. This is proven by flash-backs and HPPD (no drug is present when one experiences a flash-back). It is the brain that produces hallucinations, not the drug. There is no visual hallucinations contained in drugs, it is wholly an effect of the mind. What makes you think you have control in the first place? You only have influence over your life, not control. You may seem to control your mind, but it is your mind that controls "you". There is no danger in releasing control over your mind, cause the impression that you have control is just an illusion. Doing it voluntary is completely different from experiencing it without choice the way you did while sick. But the fact that you fear losing control is a good indicator that you may have problems achieving or dealing with such a experience. And how can you be sure that "other people" aren't just a hallucination you are having? It wouldn't be strange if they were agreeing with you about what reality is, if they are your hallucination. The problem with reality is that you can never be sure if there really is an external world since everything you see, feel, hear, is created within your mind. Sensory input may be an illusion. Try salvia and you'll get the idea. It doesn't have to be real just cause it seems like it. These are feeling/experiences you have trained yourself not to experience from a very early age. Can your mind really produce something that is harmful for your mind? Rationality is a laughable concept when you are on shrooms, it is revealed as self-deceit.

This I know, but observed mass (or effects of it) depends on your frame and the frame the the observed object. Mass is cited as the reason why we can't accelerate a particle to light speed.

So you're saying that the mass of my fuel does not change along with the mass of my spaceship? Does my fuel contain less energy if I'm traveling faster? When you're accelerating a particle in an accelerator you are using energy supplied from a different frame. Trivial? Has it been observed? It seems very counter-intuitive that time dilation has two causes.

The relativistic mass of the fuel increases at the same rate as the relativistic mass of the ship. So, no problem with energy supply. Relative to your own frame you have just as much energy available as if you stood still. If two things originated from the same thing/place (Big bang), and they are now traveling at different velocities relative to each other, then one or both must have accelerated relative to the other or relative to the origin. Thus, any relative movement in the universe is a result of acceleration. Thus, time dilation is caused by acceleration/gravity, not velocity differences. This implies that the total time dilation is not dependent on its final velocity difference, but on the amount of acceleration/deceleration/gravity it has experienced since the first measurement.

I've had this experience once (15 years ago), and once was enough. Had I been asleep I would have written it off as a nightmare or sleep paralysis. But this happened while I was watching TV in my room. I heard heavy breathing on the top of the bookcase, there was no doubt that it was breathing, it was as clear as any other real sound. I turned of the TV and could exactly located the source of the sound but there was nothing there. Then I heard "it" jump down on the floor and move slowly towards me. I'm not easily frightened and since I could not see anything I presumed that this was just some interesting trick my own mind was playing on me, so I walked over to it and reached towards the sound. A region of cold air was clearly definable around "it" and enveloped my hand when I stuck it through the "creature". It was about 3 feet high and did not seem to stop just because I touched it. I climbed into my bed to get away from it, but it climbed in after me. I concluded that this "thing" could not hurt me in any way since it was clearly not a physical "thing", so I lay down and tried to ignore it. The "thing" then crept onto my chest and I could clearly feel its weight. Then it lay its hand around my throat and started to strangle me. Since I did not feel any strangling sensation I decided to just ignore it (after cursing at it and telling it that it had no power to hurt me) and I fell asleep. I have never "seen" it since, but later when I moved in with my girlfriend, her 4 year old son woke one night and came screaming into our room saying that a little ugly man stared at him while he was sleeping (I hadn't told ANYONE about this, not even my girlfriend). He described him as three feet tall and refused to go into his bedroom for a whole month even in daylight. He still remembers this "ugly little man" clearly even though he is now nineteen. I really don't know how to explain this but sleep paralysis doesn't quite fit since I am sure I was completely awake when it happened.

Hallucinogens are known to cause such effects. It is a quite fascinating and beautiful experience which can keep you occupied for hours on end (if you are inclined to such experimentation). Music can be seen as colored waves moving through the room. The sound of leafs moving in the breeze can feel like eggshells against the skin or taste like seashells. Sounds can be warm, cold or friendly. Colors can vibrate with a humming sound. Visual input can have taste and emotion.

Hi, new guy here. There are a couple of things I have issues with concerning the relativity theory. The first is the matter of accelerating a mass up to the speed of light. It is said that doing this would require infinite energy and that this is supported by particle accelerator experiments. When you are accelerating a particle with energy supplied from a system at rest, it is true that you would require infinite energy. It's all relative right? If the energy for acceleration was supplied from an on-board energy source on a spaceship, the mass of the energy source (and it's energy) would increase at the same rate as the mass of the spaceship. I can't see how the argument that accelerating something to light speed requires infinite energy, can be true. It should be easier to accelerate a spaceship than a subatomic particle to such speeds. The second thing is time dilation. Gravity causes time dilation, right? Time goes slower on Earth than on Mars, right? Velocity difference between two objects causes time dilation, right? Gravity is equivalent to acceleration, right? Time dilation doesn't have two causes does it? The true cause of time dilation must be acceleration. If the universe came from a single point then every velocity difference must have developed due to things accelerating in different directions and rates relative to each other. Every velocity difference must have been caused by an acceleration. So my conclusion is that every twin-paradox thought experiment that does not take acceleration into account will be wrong. If I accelerate to the speed of light by 1G and afterwards decelerate at the same rate, time dilation will not happen relative to time on earth (supposing we lived that long). Is there anything wrong with my reasoning here? I'm not saying that the relativity theory is wrong, just the interpretations of its implications.