To which you replied, dearest sister in Christ: Actually, I believe a theory would lose its status as a "law" if it were ever shown to not be universal to the system. Note that all physical systems are finite.
What on earth is kosta talking about? On what basis would we be "observing and measuring" anything in the first place, if we didn't already presuppose a universal criterion by which such activities could be evaluated and judged in the first place? The existence of which kosta (and others) want us "to prove" to his satisfaction — notwithstanding that he himself has been standing on it all the time?
Self-contradictions just continue to pile up....
Thank you ever so much, dearest sister in Christ, for your most perceptive essay/post!
I am sorry you don't understand what I am talking about. It seems pretty self-evident, but I guess not to all. We did not come up with logic out of the clear blue, betty boop, just as we did not "presuppose" a circle and then proceeded to establish universal geometrical "laws" that apply to circles no matter what universe they are in.
I believe you have the whole thing backwards. Rather man first discovered a circle, a physical shape, whether a rock, or a drawing, and then proceeded to see how many times can one fit a diameter around it and discovered a physical fact that there was always an amount left over, which the Greeks called a π.
That is the property of circles. Circle is a two-dimensional shape. It didn't exist before the material world was created.
Self-contradictions just continue to pile up....
Thank you so much for your insights, dearest sister in Christ, and for your encouragements!