He actually has revealed his personal relationship with each one of us in a thoroughly scientific way. The physics, the testing and peer reviewing, has all been done. Everything except the extrapolation of this divine relationship with the individual, from the clear, unambiguous evidence.
I am referring to the personalizing/customizing of the absolute speed of light to the observer, irrespective of whether he is stationary or moving at a constant speed. In our space-time reference-frame that is a unique occurrence. Measurement of the speed of everything else is relative.
Two cars running parallel to each other, one at 30 mph the other at 50 mph; the speed of the 50 mph car, as measured by an observer in the other car would be 20 mph, since his car is already travelling at 30 mph in the same direction.
The same two cars at night-time have the beams of another car's head-lights behind them shining on the respective rears of their car. The speed of the light-beams shone on them by the car behind them will always be found by the observer in each one of them, to be that same absolute speed, despite the different speeds at which their own respective vehicles are travelling.
This is how it is expressed at 'howitwordsdaily.com':
"Einsteins Theory of Special Relativity, first postulated in 1905, says that the laws of physics and the speed of light are the same for all observers, regardless of their own speed or motion. To have a better understanding, imagine two people travelling at different speeds observing the same beam of light. According to Special Relativity, both will record the same speed for the beam, regardless of their own speed and direction.
This contradicts more practical examples on Earth. If a car moves at 40mph away from an observer, and another travels at 50mph from the same point in the same direction, relative to each other the second car will be moving at 10mph. However, a light beam moving in the same direction as the cars would appear to have no change in speed relative to them and would remain at its universally agreed value c, about 299,792,458 metres per second. Of course, this is theoretical and in practice not measurable, but nevertheless its the basis of Einsteins Theory of Special Relativity."
It amounts to scientific proof of the existence of a personal God - theism, and not just the impersonal 'deism'. It is counter-rational at the mechanistic level, but so is quantum physics.
There is a 'cosy', secular convention that the paradoxes of physics, increasingly proliferating, the deeper it is probed, are counter-intuitive. They are not. They are counter-rational. But that would destroy the mystique they like to propagate and preserve at all costs around science, as a special, uniquely sound and sure form of knowledge, when the reality is that the paradoxes of physics are every bit as unfathomably, indeed, imponderably mysterious (or 'absurd', as the fathers of quantum physics, Max Planck and Niels Bohr, preferred to call it), as are the mysteries taught by the Christian church concerning the nature of the Most Holy Trinity and Christ's incarnation, for example.
Today's secular scientists follow "the letter" of the precepts of the great paradigm-changers, but can't actually bring themselves to embrace the actual truths, themselves; hence the use of the term, "counter-intuitive", claiming a passion for intuitive thinking, while clinging for dear life onto the certainties of mechanistic, Newtonian physics, petrified of the intellectually humbling pardadigm of quantum physics, with its authors' unashamed invocation of absurdity, absolutely repugnant to reason, and hence, intrinsically unfathomable.
The first thing the 'naive realists', as Einstein called them, will say, is: "Where did the Church get the evidence?" Well, Einstein did not arrive at his relativity theories by the scientific method. He used his singularly un-hidebound imagination; as he often stated he considered imagination to be more important than knowledge. He once pointed to the drawer in his desk at the patent office, and remarked to a colleague that that was his Department of Theoretical Physics.
I have identified your repeated efforts in the construction of several straw man fallacies contained in your arguments to point out the desperation you have employed in your efforts. (So sorry to steal your thunder Mr pants, but I was here long before you.
) Nice to see that even if on a subconscious level, you are indeed reading my posts and processing them.
